What is the current state of the law on communication in sign language?
The following excerpt is from Gilbert v. United States, 366 F.2d 923 (9th Cir. 1966):
14 This was dictum because, under Adams v. People of State of New York, 1904, 192 U.S. 585, 598, 24 S.Ct. 372, 48 L.Ed. 575, the evidence would then have been admissible anyway. This is no longer the rule, Weeks v. United States, 1914, 232 U.S. 383, 34 S.Ct. 341, 58 L.Ed. 652.
15 No doubt there can be communication that does not come from the lips, as when one nods or shakes his head in response to a question, or speaks in sign language, or writes rather than speaks. Cf. Mr. Justice Brennan's discussion in Schmerber v. State of California, 1966, 384 U.S. 757, 763-764, 86 S.Ct. 1826, 16 L.Ed.2d 908.
16 The holding in Schmerber is reinforced by the dissent of Mr. Justice Black, which rejects the Wigmore formulation.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
