Explain how evidence can be obtained and used for purposes of enforcing regulato

Question

Explain how evidence can be obtained and used for purposes of enforcing regulatory rules. What are the constitutional issues surrounding the gathering of evidence by inspectors? Depending on the form of source, there are different types of evidence. Evidence in the concept of enforcing regulatory law governs the use of testimony. Under the law, evidence can be an oral or written statement; for example, affidavit. Evidence can also be obtained and used from exhibits or physical objects, and still yet, from documentary materials which are admissible in a judicial or administrative proceeding. However, there is guidelines/policy on admissible evidences in both federal and administrative hearings. Guidelines governing the rules of evidence attempt to dismiss some forms of evidence in hearings, to avoid risking lay jurors giving so much evidence so much value, Hall (2015). In the South Dakota v. Department of Interior case, the defendant (Secretary) used exhibit of the land affidavit accompanied by a written statement to keep the land in trust for the Indian Tribes. Constitutionally, the law allowed to be considered by the trier of fact, such as jury. Notwithstanding, the law must ensure certain regulatory guidelines are followed and set out to determine the kind of evidence presented to the court are trustworthy and admissible under the specific condition of the situation. When a civil or criminal matter is being disputed and reaches the court, there are required issues under evidence guidelines/policy one party must prove to persuade the court in his or her favor. The APA states, “Any oral or documentary evidence may be received, but the agency as a matter of policy shall provide for the exclusion of irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious evidence” (Hall, 2015 p. 218). Reference: Hall, D. E. (2015). Administrative Law: Bureaucracy in a Democracy (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. This is the key your last sentence. The rules are much slacker than they are in the state and federal courts. Please answer this question: Do you think the slacker rules from evidence are good? if so, why so? If not, why not?

Explanation / Answer

Evidence - Any matter of the fact that a party to a lawsuit offers to prove or disprove the issue in the case. A system of rules and standards that is used to determine which facts may be admitted, and to what extent a judge or jury may consider those facts as a proof of a particular issue in a lawsuit.

There are several types of evidence, depending on the form or source. Evidence governs the use of testimony (e.g. oral or written statements such as affidavits) exhibits (e.g. physical objects), documentary material or demonstrative evidence, which are admissible in judicial or administrative proceeding.

Many of the people, who appeared to be putting in the hours, were actually slacking off.

Congress in 1975, adopted the Federal rules of Evidence, are the official rules if federal court proceedings.

One important benchmark of admissibility is relevance. All relevant evidence is admissible, except as otherwise provided. Evidence that is offered to help prove something that is not an issue is immaterial.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse E
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.