Show simple item record

Doubts About Daubert: Psychiatric Anecdata as a Case Study

dc.contributor.authorSlobogin, Christopher, 1951-
dc.date.accessioned2014-08-12T21:14:31Z
dc.date.available2014-08-12T21:14:31Z
dc.date.issued2000
dc.identifier.citation57 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 919 (2000)en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1803/6652
dc.description.abstractIn Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., the Supreme Court sensibly held that testimony purporting to be scientific is admissible only if it possesses sufficient indicia of scientific validity. In Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, the Court more questionably held that opinion evidence based on "technical" and "specialized" knowledge must meet the same admissibility threshold as scientific testimony. This Article addresses the implications of these two decisions for opinion evidence presented by mental health professionals in criminal trials.en_US
dc.format.extent1 PDF (33 pages)en_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherWashington & Lee Law Reviewen_US
dc.subject.lcshEvidence, Expert -- United Statesen_US
dc.subject.lcshForensic psychiatry -- United Statesen_US
dc.titleDoubts About Daubert: Psychiatric Anecdata as a Case Studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record