计算机取证和电子证据-作为律师无效协助的合格计算机取证分析和其他计算机相关行为的失败

M. Losavio, D. Keeling
{"title":"计算机取证和电子证据-作为律师无效协助的合格计算机取证分析和其他计算机相关行为的失败","authors":"M. Losavio, D. Keeling","doi":"10.1109/SADFE.2011.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"American defendants have the right to the effective assistance of counsel in criminal prosecutions pursuant to the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. We examine how the effective assistance of counsel addresses competence and expertise with computer and digital forensics and electronic evidence. There is a floor of competence in modern litigation requiring competence as to the use of computer forensic services, at least in cases where electronic evidence is used. This is an area that is only now developing and which will continue to evolve. Examination of reported United States cases show a significant increase in the referenced use of computer forensics from 2004 through 2010, indicating significant growth in the use of digital forensics. Digital forensics has also been referenced by the courts, thought to a lesser degree. There are also the first reported cases to appear that assert defense counsel was ineffective for not using such counsel, asserting that counsel was not competent in that failure. The numbers of such cases, though, are too small to indicate anything other than the appearance of this concern as a matter required of competent counsel. Nonetheless, it may indicate a growing use and expectation of competence in the use of computer and digital forensic expertise in the analysis of electronic evidence.","PeriodicalId":264200,"journal":{"name":"2011 Sixth IEEE International Workshop on Systematic Approaches to Digital Forensic Engineering","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Computer Forensics And Electronic Evidence - Failure of Competent Computer Forensic Analysis And Other Computer-Related Acts As Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel\",\"authors\":\"M. Losavio, D. Keeling\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/SADFE.2011.6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"American defendants have the right to the effective assistance of counsel in criminal prosecutions pursuant to the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. We examine how the effective assistance of counsel addresses competence and expertise with computer and digital forensics and electronic evidence. There is a floor of competence in modern litigation requiring competence as to the use of computer forensic services, at least in cases where electronic evidence is used. This is an area that is only now developing and which will continue to evolve. Examination of reported United States cases show a significant increase in the referenced use of computer forensics from 2004 through 2010, indicating significant growth in the use of digital forensics. Digital forensics has also been referenced by the courts, thought to a lesser degree. There are also the first reported cases to appear that assert defense counsel was ineffective for not using such counsel, asserting that counsel was not competent in that failure. The numbers of such cases, though, are too small to indicate anything other than the appearance of this concern as a matter required of competent counsel. Nonetheless, it may indicate a growing use and expectation of competence in the use of computer and digital forensic expertise in the analysis of electronic evidence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":264200,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2011 Sixth IEEE International Workshop on Systematic Approaches to Digital Forensic Engineering\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-05-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2011 Sixth IEEE International Workshop on Systematic Approaches to Digital Forensic Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/SADFE.2011.6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2011 Sixth IEEE International Workshop on Systematic Approaches to Digital Forensic Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SADFE.2011.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

根据美国宪法第六修正案,美国被告有权在刑事诉讼中获得律师的有效协助。我们研究了律师如何有效地协助处理计算机和数字取证和电子证据方面的能力和专业知识。在现代诉讼中,至少在使用电子证据的案件中,需要具备使用计算机法医服务的能力,这是一个能力底线。这是一个刚刚发展起来的领域,并将继续发展。对报告的美国案件的检查显示,从2004年到2010年,计算机取证的参考使用显著增加,表明数字取证的使用显著增长。数字取证也被法院引用,但程度较低。也有第一批报告的案件,声称辩护律师没有使用这种律师是无效的,声称律师在这种失败中没有能力。不过,这类案件的数量太少,只能表明这种关切是需要有能力的律师处理的问题。尽管如此,它可能表明在分析电子证据时越来越多地使用和期望使用计算机和数字法医专业知识的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Computer Forensics And Electronic Evidence - Failure of Competent Computer Forensic Analysis And Other Computer-Related Acts As Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel
American defendants have the right to the effective assistance of counsel in criminal prosecutions pursuant to the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. We examine how the effective assistance of counsel addresses competence and expertise with computer and digital forensics and electronic evidence. There is a floor of competence in modern litigation requiring competence as to the use of computer forensic services, at least in cases where electronic evidence is used. This is an area that is only now developing and which will continue to evolve. Examination of reported United States cases show a significant increase in the referenced use of computer forensics from 2004 through 2010, indicating significant growth in the use of digital forensics. Digital forensics has also been referenced by the courts, thought to a lesser degree. There are also the first reported cases to appear that assert defense counsel was ineffective for not using such counsel, asserting that counsel was not competent in that failure. The numbers of such cases, though, are too small to indicate anything other than the appearance of this concern as a matter required of competent counsel. Nonetheless, it may indicate a growing use and expectation of competence in the use of computer and digital forensic expertise in the analysis of electronic evidence.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信