Edward J. Imwinkelried
Edward L. Barrett, Jr. Professor of Law Emeritus
B.A., magna cum laude Political Science, University of San Francisco 1967
J.D., magna cum laude, University of San Francisco School of Law 1969
Edward Imwinkelried could easily be a model for a character in crime fiction. News stories quoting him have included "Probers Use DNA Tests to Find Killer in Florida," "Love-Triangle Killing: Defense Questions Police," and "Will High-Tech Sleuthing Hold Up in Court?" To the country's prosecutors and defense attorneys, he is the one to consult about the admissibility of scientific evidence and evidence of uncharged crimes.
"These are two very specialized areas of evidence," said Imwinkelried. "They also happen to be the two areas that place a premium on creativity and imagination."
Imwinkelried wrote the book on scientific evidence, literally and figuratively. The Supreme Court itself cited the book in its landmark 1993 case, Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals on expert testimony. Now in a forthcoming fourth edition, Scientific Evidence treats such subjects as DNA typing, forensic psychiatry, and laser techniques for fingerprint detection.
The admission of evidence of uncharged crimes, the topic of another of his books, is the "single most litigated issue on the criminal side of the law," he said. Such evidence often looms large in cases of mass murderers. Before the O.J. Simpson trial, the Trial of the 20th Century was the prosecution of Wayne Williams for the Atlanta child killings. "Wayne Williams, for instance, was charged on two counts, but the hair and fiber evidence showed a pattern that pulled together 10 other killings," said Imwinkelried. "Once a jury is allowed to hear that, the whole atmosphere of the trial changes and the likelihood of a conviction increases dramatically.
Selected Career Highlights
- Former chair, the Evidence Section, Association of American Law Schools
- Author of Uncharged Misconduct Evidence, revised, 1999; New Wigmore: Evidentiary Privileges, 2002
- Co-author of Scientific Evidence, 5th ed., 2012; McCormick Evidence, 7th ed, 2013
In the News
Harrington & Imwinkelried, The Use of Isotope-Ratio Mass Spectrometry (IRMS) and Isotope Ratio Analysis in Food Forensics, 55 Criminal Law Bulletin 223 (2019)
Imwinkelried, "The Evidentiary Issue Crystalized by the Cosby and Weinstein Scandals: The Propriety of Admitting Testimony About an Accused's Uncharged Misconduct Under the Doctrine of Objective Chances to Prove Identity," 48 Southwestern Law Review 1 (2019).
Imwinkelried, Regulating Expert Evidence in US Courts: Measuring Daubert's Impact, in Forensic Science Evidence and Expert Witness Testimony: Reliability Through Reform? (P. Roberts & M. Stockdale, eds. 2018)
Imwinkelried, The Legal Sufficiency Analysis of Genuine Battles of the Experts in Criminal Trials: The Unrealized Potential of the Supreme Court's Landmark Decision in Jackson v. Virginia, 54 Criminal Law Bulletin 1243 (2018).
Imwinkelried, Debunked, Discredited, But Still Defended: Revising State Post-Conviction Relief Statutes to Cover Convictions Resting on Subsequently Invalidated Expert Testimony, 48 Seton Hall Law Review 1095 (2018)
Imwinkelried, A Brief Comment on the Response by Professor Findley and Risinger to My Original Contribution to Professor Risinger's Symposium, 48 Seton Hall Law Review 1229 (2018).
Imwinkelried & Menaster, California Trial Objections: 2018-2019 Edition (Thomson Reuters 2018).
Carlson, Imwinkelried, Seaman & Beecher-Monas, Evidence: Teaching Materials for an Age of Science and Statutes (Carolina Academic Press 8th ed. 2018)
Imwinkelried, "The Best Insurance Against Miscarriages of Justice Caused by Junk Science: An Admissibility Standard that Is Scientifically and Legally Sound," 81 Albany Law Review 851 (2017/2018).
Imwinkelried, Professor Paul Giannelli, (Almost) a Half-Century Later: The "Dean" of this Era's Scientific Evidence Scholars, 68 Case Western Reserve L.Rev. 701(2018).
Reed & Imwinkelried, Questioned Document Examination Techniques for Absolute Dynamic Dating of Ballpoint Inks, 54 Criminal Law Bulletin 700 (2018).
Imwinkelried, Evidentiary Foundations (LexisNexis 10th ed. 2018).
Thomas Lee Stewart, John C. O'Brien & Edward J. Imwinkelried, MISSOURI EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS (4th ed. 2018).
Radke & Imwinkelried, Massively Parallel Sequencing (MPS): The Next Step in the Evolution of DNA Identifications, 54 Criminal Law Bulletin 233 (Jan./Feb. 2018).
Imwinkelried,"The Form of Reform: Revisiting the Choice Among a Creed, a Code, and a Catalogue," 13 FRONTIERS OF LAW IN CHINA 1 (Mar. 2018).
Imwinkelried & Menaster, Imwinkelried and Menaster California Evidence Code Annotated 2018 Desktop Edition (Thomson Reuters 2018).
Fred Galves, Edward J. Imwinkelried & Thomas J. Leach, Evidence Simulations (West Academic 2d ed. 2018).
E. Imwinkelried & J. Leach, California Evidentiary Foundations (LexisNexis 5th ed. 2017).
Imwinkelried, Criminal Minds: The Need to Refine the Application of the Doctrine of Objective Chances as a Justification for Introducing Uncharged Misconduct Evidence to Prove Intent, 45 Hofstra L.Rev. 851 (2017)
Edward J. Imwinkelried, Computer Source Code: A Source of the Growing Controversy Over the Reliability of Automated Forensic Techniques, 66 DePaul L.Rev. 97
Ronald L. Carlson & Edward J. Imwinkelried, Dynamics of Trial Practice: Problems and Materials (West Academic 5th ed. 2017).
Imwinkelried, "Forensic Science: Novel Techniques to Link a Shooter to the Bullet or Cartridges Used in a Shooting Incident--A Cautionary Tale of Putting the Legal Cart Before the Scientific Horse," 53 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 158 (2017).
Imwinkelried & Menaster, California Evidence Code Annotated (Thomson Reuters 2017).
D. Schlueter, S. Saltzburg, L. Schinasi & E. Imwinkelried, Military Evidentiary Foundations (LexisNexis 6th ed. 2016).
Edward J. Imwinkelried, The New Wigmore: Evidentiary Privileges (Wolters Kluwer 3d ed. 2017)(2 vols.).
Saks, Imwinkelried et al., Forensic Bitemark Identification: Weak Foundations, Exaggerated Claims, Journal of Law and the Biosciences, dio:10.1093/jlb/lsw045 (2016).
E. Imwinkelried, P. Giannelli, F. Gilligan, F. Lederer & L. Richter, Courtroom Criminal Evidence (LexisNexis Pub. Co. 6th ed. 2016)(2 vols.).
Edward J. Imwinkelried & Albert J. Menaster, California Trial Objections: 2016-2017 Edition (Thomson Reuters 2016).
Imwinkelried, The Case for the Present Sense Impression Hearsay Exception: The Relevance of the Original Version of Federal Rule of Evidence 803 to Judge Posner's Criticism of the Exception, 54 University of Louisville Law Review 455 (2016).
Interview with Professor Edward J. Imwinkelried, 42 Litigation, Sum. 2016, at 21.
Song & Imwinkelried, Animal Behavior as Scientific Evidence, 52 Criminal Law Bulletin 788 (2016).
Imwinkelried, "Should Rape Shield Laws Bar Proof that the Alleged Victim Has Made Similar, False Rape Accusations in the Past? Fair Symmetry with the Rape Sword Laws," 47 University of Pacific Law Review709 (2016).
Imwinkelried, The Effect of the Successful Assertion of the State Secrets Privilege in a Civil Lawsuit in Which the Government is Not a Party: When, If Ever, Should the Defendant Shoulder the Burden of the Government's Successful Privilege Claim?, 16 WYOMING LAW REVIEW 1 (2016).
Edward J. Imwinkelried & Daniel D. Blinka, Criminal Evidentiary Foundations (LexisNexis 3d ed. 2016).
Luu & Imwinkelried, The Challenge of Bitcoin Pseudo-Anonymity to Computer Forensics, 52 Criminal Law Bulletin 191 (2016).
Imwinkelried, "A Reply to Professor Rothstein's Comment," 49 CREIGHTON LAW REVIEW 135 (2015).
Imwinkelried and Menaster's California Evidence Code Annotated--2016 Desktop Edition (Thomson Reuters 2016).
Imwinkelried, "Evidence of a Third Party's Guilt of the Crime that the Accused is Charged with: The Constitutionalization of the SODDI (Some Other Dude Did It) Defense 2.0," 47 Loyola University Chicago Law Journal 91 (2015).
Imwinkelried, Expert Witness: Daubert and Beyond, in 2 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF FORENSIC AND LEGAL MEDICINE 456 (2d ed. 2016).
Edward Imwinkelried & Norman Garland, Exculpatory Evidence: The Accused's Constitutional Right to Introduce Favorable Evidence (LexisNexis 4th ed. 2015).
Steussy, Eisen, Imwinkelried & Vandamme, "Microbial Forensics: The Biggest Thing Since DNA?", 51 Criminal Law Bulletin 726 (May-June 2015).
Imwinkelried, Distinguishing Law from Expert Opinion: The Need to Focus on the Epistemological Differences Between the Reasoning Processes Used by Lay and Expert Witnesses, 68 SMU L.Rev. 73 (2015).
D. Reynolds, M. Bright, R. Carlson & E. Imwinkelried, Georgia Objections at Trial, (N.I.T.A. 2015).
Imwinkelried, Formalism Versus Pragmatism in Evidence: Reconsidering the Absolute Ban on the Use of Extrinsic Evidence to Prove Impeaching, Untruthful Acts That Have Not Resulted in a Conviction, 48 Creighton Law Review 213 (2015).
Mayor & Imwinkelried, Skid Mark Analysis: The Central Importance of the Minor Premise, 51 Criminal Law Bulletin 437 (2015)
Myron H. Bright, Ronald L. Carlson & Edward J. Imwinkelried, Objections at Trial, (7th ed. 2015)
Imwinkelried, A Statute Overtaken by Time: The Need to Reinterpret Federal Rule of Evidence 803(A)(iii) Governing the Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Government Investigative Reports, 46 St.Mary's L.J. 31 (2014).
E. Imwinkelried, A Pocketbook on Contracts: "The Big Picture", (LexisNexis 2014).
Mosteller, Beskind, Baddour & Imwinkelried, North Carolina Evidentiary Foundations, (LexisNexis 3d ed. 2104).
E. Imwinkelried, Evidentiary Foundations, (LexisNexis 9th ed. 2015).
Imwinkelried, Preliminary Thoughts on an Attorney-Client Privilege for Law Firms: When a Current Client Threatens to Sue the Firm for Malpractice, Does the Privilege Apply to the Firm's Consultation with In-House Counsel About the Potential Claim?, 48 Valparaiso University Law Review 715 (2014).
Imwinkelried, The Applicability of Privileges to Employees' Personal E-Mails: The Errors Caused by the Confusion Between Privilege Confidentiality and Other Notions of Privacy, 2014 Michigan State Law Review 1.
Imwinkelried, The Tactical Choice Under Federal Rule of Evidence 703, 41 Litigation, Fall 2014, at 8.
Imwinkelried, "The Importance of Forensic Metrology in Preventing Miscarriages of Justice: Intellectual Honesty About the Uncertainty of Measurement in Scientific Analysis", 7 John Marshall Law Journal 331 (2014).
Imwinkelried & Faigman, Sargon Enterprises v. USC--A Different Perspective, 1California Litigation, vol. 27, no. 2, at 14 (2014).
Osman & Imwinkelried, Facial Recognition Systems, 50 Crim.L.Bull. 695 (2014).
Imwinkelried, THE METHODS OF ATTACKING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, (LexisNexis 5th ed. 2014)
Imwinkelried, “The Government’s Increasing Reliance On—And Abuse Of—the Deliberative Process Evidentiary Privilege: ‘[T]he Last Will Be First’”, 83 Mississippi Law Journal 509 (2014).
McCormick on Evidence, (7th Student Ed. 2014).
Noval & Imwinkelried, Retrograde Extrapolation of Blood Alcohol Concentration, 50 Criminal Law Bulletin 188 (2014)
Schuelter, Saltzburg, Schinasi & Imwinkelried, Military Evidentiary Foundations, (LexisNexis 5th ed. 2013).
Imwinkelried, “The Epistemological Trend in the Evolution of the Law of Expert Testimony: A Scrutiny at Once Broader,” Narrower, and Deeper”, 47 Georgia Law Review 863 (2013).
Beck, Magana & Imwinkelried, “The Use of Global Positioning (GPS) and Cell Tower Evidence to Establish a Person’s Location—Part II”, 49 Criminal Law Bulletin 637 (2013).
Faigman & Imwinkelried, "Wading into the DAUBERT Tide: SARGON ENTERPRISES, INC. V. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA", 64 Hastings L.J. 1665 (2013)
Imwinkelried, The Gordian Knot of the Treatment of Secondhand Facts Under Federal Rule of Evidence 703 Governing the Admissibility of Expert Opinions: Another Conflict Between Logic and Law, 3 U.Denver Crim.L.Rev. 1 (2013)
Imwinkelried, The Need for Truly Systemic Analysis of Proposals for Reform of Both Pretrial Practice and Evidentiary Rules: The Role of the Law of Unintended Consequences in "Litigation" Reform, 32 Review of Litigation 201 (2013)
Imwinkelried, Forensic Metrology: A New Honesty About the Uncertainty of Measurement in Scientific Analysis, Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Evidence Law and Forensic Science 23 (2013)
Galves, Imwinkelried & Leach, Evidence Simulations, (West Pub. Co. 2013)
Imwinkelried, Dealing with Unanticipated Defense Tactics, 49 Trial, July 2013, at 45
Dix, Imwinkelried, Kaye, Mosteller, Roberts & Swift, McCormick on Evidence, (Thomson Reuters 7th ed. 2013)(2 vols.)
Myron Bright, Ronald Carlson & Edward Imwinkelried, Objections at Trial, (NITA 6th ed. 2013)
Imwinkelried, The Validity of the 2010 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 Amendment Governing the Waiver of Work Product Protection: Is the Work Product Doctrine an Evidentiary Privilege?, 37 University of Dayton Law Review 279 (2012)
Imwinkelried, A Trial Advocacy Postscript to the Daubert Hearing, 46 U.C.Davis Law Review 931 (2013)
Imwinkelried, The Golden Anniversary of the "Preliminary Study of the Advisability and Feasibility of Developing Uniform Rules of Evidence for the Federal Courts": Mission Accomplished?, 57 Wayne Law Review 1367 (2011).
Imwinkelried, Protecting the Attorney-Client Privilege in Business Negotiations: Would the Application of the Subject-Matter Waive Doctrine Really Drive Attorneys from the Bargaining Table?, 51 Duquesne Law Review 167 (2013).
Beck, Magana & Imwinkelried, "The Use of Global Position System (GPS) and Cell Tower Evidence to Establish a Person's Location—Part I," 49 Criminal Law Bulletin 160 (Jan.-Feb. 2013).
R. Carlson, E. Imwinkelried, J. Seaman & E. Beecher-Monas, Evidence: Teaching Materials for an Age of Science and Statutes, (7th ed. 2012)
Paul C. Giannelli, Edward J. Imwinkelried, Andrea Roth & James Campbell Moriarity, Scientific Evidence, (LexisNexis 5th ed. 2012)(2 vols.)
E. Imwinkelried & T. Hallahan, California Trial Objections, 2012 Edition (West 2012).
O'Brien, Stewart & Imwinkelried, Missouri Evidentiary Foundations, Juris 3d ed. 2012
Imwinkelred, Mendez & Gaal, Document Summaries in Evidence, California Lawyer, May 2012, at 37
Cherry, Imwinkelried, Shenk, Romano, Fetterman, Hardin & Beckman, Call Tower Junk Science, 95 Judicature 151 (Feb. 2012)
Imwinkelried, Evidentiary Foundations, LexisNexis 8th ed. 2012
DeFranco & Imwinkelried, Forensic Science: The Role of the Acid Phospatase Spot Test in Sexual Assault Prosecutions, 48 Criminal Law Bulletin 195 (2012)
E. Imwinkelried, P. Giannelli, F.Gilligan & F. Lederer, Courtroom Criminal Evidence, (LexisNexis 5th ed.2011)(2 vols.)
Reference Guide on Forensic Identification Expertise, Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence 55 (3rd ed. 2011).
Using The National Research Council's Report, Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward (2009, in the Courtroom), 47 Criminal Law Bulletin 975 (2011)
Dangerous Trend Blurring Distinction Between a Reasonable Expectation of Confidentiality in Privilege Law and a Reasonable Expectation of Privacy in Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence, Loyola Law Review 1 (2011)
The End of the Era of Proxies, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Evidence Law and Forensic Science 8 (Beijing 2011)
Application of the Attorney-Client Privilege to Interaction Among Clients, Attorneys, and Experts in the Age of Consultants: The need for a More Precise, Fundamental Analysis, 48 Houston Law Review 265 (2011)
Serendipitous Timing: The Coincidental emergence of the New Brain Science and the Advent of an Epistemological approach to Determining the admissibility of Expert Testimony. , 62 Mercer Law Review 959 (2011)
Another 'View' of Fingerprint Evidence, 94 Judicature 306 (May-June 2011)
Texas Evidentiary Foundations, LexisNexis 4th ed. 2011
The Admissibility of Evidence of the Accused's Opportunity to Retest Physical Evidence in Criminal Cases, 37 New England Journal of Trial Advocacy 135
A Brief Essay on Aristotle, Philosopher-Litigator, 34 American Journal of Trial Advocacy 135 (2010)
Forensic Intoxication Testing: From Breath to Saliva?, 47 Criminal Law Bulletin 131
In Memoriam: A Tribute to David P. Leonard, 43 Loyola Los Angeles Law Review 739 (2010)
CALIFORNIA TRIAL OBJECTIONS, (West 2d ed. 2010) (with Timothy H. Hallahan)
Professor Margaret Berger, the Epitome of the Fully Engaged Scholar and Friend of the Court, 75 BROOKLYN LAW REVIEW 1153 (2010)
THE DYNAMICS OF TRIAL PRACTICE: PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS, (Thomson West 4th ed. 2010) (with R. Carlson)
A Crash Course in Rule 502, 46 TRIAL 38 (July 2010)
The Second Coming of Res Gestae: A Procedural Approach to Untangling the "Inextricably Intertwined" Theory for Admitting Evidence of an Accused's Uncharged Misconduct, 59 CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 719 (2010)
Shaken Baby Syndrome: A Genuine Battle of the Scientific (and Non-Scientific) Experts, 46 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 156 (2010)
The Implied Obligation of Good Faith in Contract Law: Is It Time to Write Its Obituary?, 42 TEXAS TECH LAW REVIEW 1 (2009)
THE NEW WIGMORE: EVIDENTIARY PRIVILEGES, (Wolters Kluwer 2d ed. 2009)(2 vols.).
CALIFORNIA EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, LexisNexis 4th ed. 2009 (with T. Leach)
Dealing with Supposed Jury Preconceptions About the Significance of the Lack of Evidence: The Difference Between the Perspective of the Policymaker and That of the Advocate, in "CSI Effect" Symposium Issue, 27 THOMAS M. COOLEY LAW REVIEW 37 (2010)
Evidence Code Section 802: The Neglected Key to Rationalizing the California Law of Expert Testimony, 42 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES LAW REVIEW 427 (2009) (with Faigman)
A New Law to Fix the Cyber Security Problem, GARDEN STATE FOCUS 16 (Sep.-Oct. 2009) (with Cherry)
The Causation Issue in Computer Security Breach Cases, 93 JUDICATURE 75 (Sep.-Oct. 2009) (with Cherry)
Bloodstain Pattern Evidence Revisited, 45 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 485 (May-June 2009) (with Gopen)
Poetic Justice in Punishing the Evidentiary Misdeed of Knowingly Offering Inadmissible Evidence, 7 INTERNATIONAL COMMENTARY ON EVIDENCE, Issue. 1, Article 6 (2009)
The Need to Resurrect the Present Sense Impression Hearsay Exception: A Relapse in Hearsay Policy, 52 HOWARD LAW JOURNAL 319 (2009)
The Use of Forensic Entomology in Determining the Time of Death, 45 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 3 (2009) (with Chan)
Redress for Loss of Private E-Data, 45 TRIAL 48 (Feb. 2009) (with Cherry)
Questions About the Accuracy of Fingerprint Evidence, 92 JUDICATURE 158 (Jan.-Feb. 2009) (with Cherry)
Rethinking the Limits of the Interpretive Maxim of Constitutional Avoidance: The Case Study of the Corroboration Requirement for Inculpatory Declarations Against Penal Interest (Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(3)), 44 GONZAGA LAW REVIEW 187 (2008/09)
"This Is Like Déjà Vu All Over Again": The Third, Constitutional, Attack on the Admissibility of Police Laboratory Reports in Criminal Cases, 39 NEW MEXICO LAW REVIEW 303 (2008)
Winning Forensic Evidence Cases--Sometimes Without Even Using an Expert Witness, 32 THE CHAMPION 24 (Nov./Dec. 2008) (with Cherry)
Viewpoint: Internet Theft Is Avoidable, 92 JUDICATURE 7 (July-Aug. 2008) (with Cherry)
Chapter 26A: Trial Strategies and Techniques for Commercial Lawsuits, in 3 DEBTOR-CREDITOR LAW (Theodore Eisenberg ed., Lexis Nexis 2008)
OBJECTIONS AT TRIAL, (National Institute of Trial Advocacy 5th ed. 2008) (with M. Bright & R. Carlson)
Controlled Substance Analogue Enforcement Act Criminal Defense, 37 SOUTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 267 (2008) (with Anacker)
CALIFORNIA TRIAL OBJECTIONS, (Thomson-West 2008) (with T. Hallahan)
EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS-IRISH EDITION, (Tottel Pub. 2008) (with L. Heffernan & R. Ryan)
Book Review: Law for the Expert Witness by Daniel A. Bronstein, 48 JURIMETRICS 241 (Wint. 2008).
The Case Against Abandoning the Search for Substantive Accuracy, 38 SETON HALL LAW REVIEW 1031 (2008).
EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (7th ed. 2008)
Confidence Intervals: How Much Confidence Should the Courts Have in Testimony About a Sample Statistic?, 44 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 257 (Mar.-Apr. 2008)
Reshaping the ‘Grotesque’ Doctrine of Character Evidence: The Reform Implications of the Most Recent Psychological Research, 36 SOUTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 741 (2008), reprinted in LAW AND JUSTICE: PSYCHOLOGY ROLE PLAY 226 (Amicus Book 2010)
CRIMINAL EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS 2d ed. 2007) (with D. Blinka)
The Lessons to be Learned from the Last Three Decades of American Legal Experience with Expert Testimony, 15 EVIDENCE SCIENCE 181 (Dec. 2007)
Clarifying the Curative Admissibility Doctrine: Using the Principles of Forfeiture and Deterrence to Shape the Relief for an Opponent’s Evidentiary Misconduct, 76 FORDHAM LAW REVIEW 1295 (2007)
MILITARY EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS 3d ed. 2007) (with D. Schlueter, S. Saltsburg & L. Schinasi)
Impoverishing the Trier of Fact: Excluding the Proponent’s Expert Testimony Due to the Opponent’s Inability to Afford Rebuttal Evidence, 40 CONNECTICUT LAW REVIEW 317 (2007)
Defeating Deference: A Practitioner’s Guide to Overcoming the Chevron Doctrine, 31 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRIAL ADVOCACY 69 (2007)
SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, (LEXIS 4th ed. 2007) (2 vols.) (with P. Giannelli)
Forensic Science: Scientific Evidence-and Statutes, 43 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 739 (Sep.-Oct. 2007)
The Danger of Exposure to the Internet, 91 JUDICATURE 57 (Sep.-Oct. 2007) (with Cherry)
Draft Article V of the Federal Rules of Evidence on Privileges, One of the Most Influential Pieces of Legislation Never Enacted: The Strength of the Ingroup Loyalty of the Federal Judiciary, 58 ALABAMA LAW REVIEW 41 (2006)
How Can We Improve the Reliability of Fingerprint Identification, 90 JUDICATURE 55 (Sep.-Oct. 2006) (with Cherry)
A Cautionary Note about Fingerprint Analysis and Reliance on Digital Technology, 89 JUDICATURE 334 (May-June 2006) (with Cherry)
United States v. Woods: A Story of the Triumph of Tradition, in EVIDENCE STORIES 59 (R.Lempert, ed. 2006)
The Organization of the Evidence Course: The ‘Preliminaries’ to Helping Students Develop the Skill of Identifying Nonhearsay, 50 ST. LOUIS UNIVERSITY LAW JOURNAL 1047 (2006)
The Alienability of Evidentiary Privileges: Of Property and Evidence, Burden and Benefit, Hearsay and Privilege, 80 ST. JOHN'S LAW REVIEW 497 (2006)
Forensic Science: The Confusing World of Controlled Substance Analogue (CSA) Criminal Defense, 42 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 744 (Nov.-Dec. 2006) (with Anacker)
McCORMICK, EVIDENCE, (Thomson West 6th ed. 2006)(2 vols.)
Forensic Science: The Importance of Daubert in Frye Jurisdictions, 42 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 215 (Mar.-Apr. 2006)
NORTH CAROLINA EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (2d ed. 2006) (with R. Mosteller, D. Beskind, C. Eagles, & T. Ross)
COURTROOM CRIMINAL EVIDENCE, (4th ed. 2005)(2 vols.) (with P. Giannelli, F. Gilligan & F. Lederer)
An Evidentiary Paradox: Defending the Character Evidence Prohibition by Upholding a Non-Character Theory of Logical Relevance, the Doctrine of Chances, 40 UNIVERSITY OF RICHMOND LAW REVIEW 419 (2006)
The Accused’s Constitutional Right to Introduce Critical, Demonstrably Reliable Exculpatory Evidence, 40 IRISH JURIST 111 (2005) (with Heffernan)
Forensic Science: Palynology, the Use of Pollen and Spores as Associative Trace Evidence, 41 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 655 (Nov.-Dec. 2005) (with Min)
Using Federal Civil Rights Laws to Right the Wrong of Evidence Spoliation in Civil Cases in State Court, 28 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRIAL ADVOCACY 279 (2004) (with Johns)
Can This Photo Be Trusted?, 41 TRIAL 48 (Oct. 2005)
EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS Law Pub. 6th ed. 2005)
Daubert Attacks: The Three Fundamentally Different Arguments That the Opponent Can Make Under Federal Rule of Evidence 104(a), 41 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 423 (July-Aug. 2005)
A More Modest Proposal Than A Common Law for the Age of Statutes: Greater Reliance in Statutory Interpretation on the Concept of Interpretative Intention, 68 ALBANY LAW REVIEW 949 (2005)
Expert Testimony by Ethicists: What Should be the Norm?, 33 THE JOURNAL OF LAW, MEDICINE & ETHICS 198 (2005)
Daubert and Beyond, in 2 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF FORENSIC AND LEGAL MEDICINE 294 (2005)
Waiver Raised to the Second Power: Waivers of Evidentiary Privileges by Lawyers Representing Accused Being Tried in Absentia, 56 SOUTH CAROLINA LAW REVIEW 509 (2005) (with Gilligan)
A Psychological Critique of the Assumptions Underlying the Law of Evidentiary Privileges: Insights from the Literature on Self-Disclosure, 38 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES LAW REVIEW 707 (2004)
TEXAS EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS Law Pub. 3d ed. 2004) (with D. Schlueter, J. Onion, & C. Barrow)
Forensic Science: Plant and Water Analysis, 41 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 75 (Jan.-Feb. 2005)
EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE: THE ACCUSED'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO INTRODUCE FAVORABLE EVIDENCE, (LEXIS Law Pub. 3d ed. 2004) (with N. Garland)
The Need to Integrate Legisprudence into the Evidence Course, in TEACHING THE LAW SCHOOL CURRICULUM 194 (Carolina Academic Press 2004)
The Relative Priority that Should Be Assigned to Trial Stage DNA Issues, in DNA AND THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM (D. Lazer, ed. 2004)
THE METHODS OF ATTACKING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, (LEXIS Law Pub. 4th ed. 2004)
"Junk Science" in the Courtroom: Will the Changes in the American Law of Expert Testimony Influence the Irish Courts?, 26 DUBLIN UNIVERSITY LAW JOURNAL 83 (2004)
The Admissibility and Legal Sufficiency of Testimony About Differential Diagnosis (Etiology): Of Under- and Over-Estimations, 56 BAYLOR LAW REVIEW 391 (2004)
Evidentiary Tactics: Selecting the ‘Best’ Evidence to Simplify the Case, 19 CRIMINAL JUSTICE 20 (Summer 2004) (with Schlueter)
Questioning the Behavioral Assumption Underlying Wigmorean Absolutism in the Law of Evidentiary Privileges, 65 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH LAW REVIEW 145 (2004)
PRETRIAL DISCOVERY: STRATEGY AND TACTICS, (Thomson West rev.ed. 2004) (with T. Blumoff)
Forensic Science: Glass Evidence, 39 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 608 (Sep.-Oct. 2003)
Comparative Bullet Lead Analysis (CBLA) Evidence: Valid Inference or Ipse Dixit?, 28 OKLAHOMA CITY LAW REVIEW 43 (2003) (with Tobin)
Using the Evidence Course as a Vehicle for Teaching Legisprudential Skills, 21 QUINNIPIAC LAW REVIEW 907 (2003)
The Relativity of Reliability, 34 SETON HALL LAW REVIEW 269 (2003)
Privacy and Privilege in Civil Family Law Disputes, 18 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF MATRIMONIAL LAWYERS 75 (2002)
The Meaning of ‘Appropriate Validation’ in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Interpreted in Light of the Broader Rationalist Tradition, Not the Narrow Scientific Tradition, 30 FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 735 (2003)
Expert Testimony by Ethicists: What Should Be the Norm?, 76 TEMPLE LAW REVIEW 91 (2003)
THE NEW WIGMORE: An Essay on Rethinking the Foundation of Evidentiary Privileges, 83 BOSTON UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 315 (2003)
The Dubiety of Social Engineering Through Evidence: A Reply to Professor Sanchirico’s Recent Article on Character Evidence, 51 DRAKE LAW REVIEW 283 (2003)
Peer Dialogue: The How and What of ‘Appropriate Validation’ Under Daubert: Reconsidering the Treatment of Einstein and Freud, 68 MISSOURI LAW REVIEW 43 (2003)
Forensic Science: Opinions by Forensic Pathologists as to the Cause of Death, 38 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 87 (Jan.-Feb. 2003)
Flawed Expert Testimony: Striking the Right Balance in Admissibility Standards, 18 CRIMINAL JUSTICE 28 (Spr. 2003)
The Reach of Winship: Invalidating Evidentiary Admissibility Standards That Undermine the Prosecution’s Obligation to Prove the Defendant’s Guilt Beyond A Reasonable Doubt, 70 UMKC LAW REVIEW 865 (2002)
DYNAMICS OF TRIAL PRACTICE: PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS, (Thompson-West 3d ed. 2002) (with R. Carlson).
A Defense of the Right to Present Defense Expert Testimony: The Flaws in the Plurality Opinion in United States v. Scheffer, 69 TENNESSEE LAW REVIEW 539 (2002)
The Historical Cycle in the Law of Evidentiary Privileges: Will Instrumentalism Come Into Conflict with the Modern Humanistic Theories?, 55 ARKANSAS LAW REVIEW 241 (2002)
EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS 5th ed. 2002).
Scientific Evidence, in 4 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF CRIME & JUSTICE (2d ed. 2002) (with Giannelli)
EVIDENCE:TEACHING MATERIALS FOR AN AGE OF SCIENCE AND STATUTES, (LEXIS 5th ed. 2002)(with Carlson, Kionka & Strachan).
THE NEW WIGMORE: A TREATISE ON EVIDENCE: EVIDENTIARY PRIVILEGES, (Aspen Law & Business 2002) (2 vols).
FLORIDA EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS 3d ed. 2001)(with Schinasi & Graham)
A Minimalist Approach to the Presentation of Expert Testimony, 31 STETSON LAW REVIEW 105 (2001)
Can We Rely on the Alleged Constitutional Right to Informational Privacy to Secure Genetic Privacy in the Courtroom?, 31 SETON HALL LAW REVIEW 926 (2001)
Introduction to the Evidence Symposium: The New Generation of Realists in Evidence Law, 55 UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI LAW REVIEW 527 (2001)
Keeping the Reformist Spirit Alive in Evidence Law, 149 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA LAW REVIEW 1277 (2001) (with Saltzburg & Capra)
OBJECTIONS AT TRIAL, (LEXIS 4th ed. 2001)(with Bright & Carlson)
DNA Typing: Emerging or Neglected Issues, 76 WASHINGTON LAW REVIEW 413 (2001) (with Kaye)
Bringing the ‘Opening the Door’ Theory to a Close: The Tendency to Overlook the Specific Contradiction Doctrine in Evidence Law, 41 SANTA CLARA LAW REVIEW 807 (2001) (with Gillian)
Forensic Science: Explosives, 37 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 80 (Jan.-Feb. 2001)
Forensic Science: Bloodspatter Analysis, 36 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 509 (Nov.Dec. 2000)
The Paradox of Privilege Law, 2 NEW TRENDS IN CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION AND EVIDENCE 339 (Intersentia 2000)
MODERN LITIGATION AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY HANDBOOK: THE LIMITS OF ZEALOUS ADVOCACY, (Aspen 2d ed. 2000)(with Fortune & Underwood).
The Judge as Daubert Gatekeeper: Adapting Old Maps to the Unfamiliar Terrain of the Brave New World, in PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SCIENCE AND THE LAW 51 (2000)
MISSOURI EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS 2d ed. 2000)(with O'Brien, Hamilton & Buckley).
Logerquist v. McVey: The Majority’s Flawed Procedural Assumptions, 33 ARIZONA STATE LAW JOURNAL 121 (2001)
Trial Judges - Gatekeepers or Usurpers? Can the Trial Judge Critically Assess the Admissibility of Expert Testimony Without Invading the Jury’s Province to Evaluate the Credibility and Weight of the Testimony?, 84 MARQUETTE LAW REVIEW 1 (2000)
The Taxonomy of Testimony Post-Kumho: Refocusing on the Bottomlines of Reliability and Necessity, 30 CUMBERLAND LAW REVIEW 185 (2000)
Prejudice to the Nth Degree: The Introduction of Uncharged Misconduct Admissible Only Against a Co-defendant at a Megatrial, 53 OKLAHOMA LAW REVIEW 35 (2000)
MILITARY EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS 2d ed. 2000)(with Schlueter, Saltzburg & Schinasi)
Jurors Perceptions or Hearsay in Child Sexual Abuse Cases, 5 PSYCHOLOGY, PUBLIC POLICY, AND LAW 388 (1999) (with Myers, Redlich, Goodman, & Prizmich)
A Final Comment -- The Importance of the Procedural Framework, 50 CASE WESTERN RESERVE LAW REVIEW 669 (2000)
Evaluating the Reliability of Nonscientific Expert Testimony: A Partial Answer to the Questions Left Unresolved by Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 52 MAINE LAW REVIEW 20 (2000)
CALIFORNIA EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS 3d ed. 2000)(with Wydick & Hogan).
Scientific Evidence: The Fallout from the U.S. Supreme Court's Decision in Kumho Tire, 14 CRIMINAL JUSTICE 12 (Wint. 2000) (with Giannelli)
CALIFORNIA AND FEDERAL EVIDENCE TRIAL BOOK, (LEXIS 1999) (with S. Saltzburg).
FORENSIC DNA TYPING: SELECTED LEGAL ISSUES, (National Commission On the Future of DNA Evidence 2000) (with D. H. Kaye).
Forensic Science: Handwriting Comparison, 35 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 517 (Sep.-Oct. 1999) (with Giannelli)
Forensic Science: Paint Evidence, 35 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 305 (May-June 1999)
The Escape Hatches from Frye and Daubert: Sometimes You Don't Need to Lay Either Foundation in Order to Introduce Expert Testimony, 23 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRIAL ADVOCACY 1 (1999)
Should the Courts Incorporate a Best Evidence Rule into the Standard Determining the Admissibility of Scientific Testimony? Enough Is Enough Even When It Is Not the Best, 50 CASE WESTERN RESERVE LAW REVIEW 19 (1999)
SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, (LEXIS 3d ed. 1999) (2 vols.) (with P. Giannelli).
PRETRIAL DISCOVERY: STRATEGY AND TACTICS, (West rev. ed. 1999) (with T. Blumoff).
McCORMICK ON EVIDENCE, (West Group 5th ed. 1999)(2 vols.) (with J. Strong, K. Broun, G. Dix, D. Kaye, R. Mosteller & E. Roberts)
Minnesota v. Philip Morris, Inc.: An Important Legal Ethics Message Which Neglects the Public Interest in Product Safety Research, 87 KENTUCKY LAW JOURNAL 1127 (1998-99) (with McCall)
Whether the Federal Rules of Evidence Should Be Conceived as a Perpetual Index Code: Blindness Is Worse Than Myopia, 40 WILLIAM AND MARY LAW REVIEW 1595 (1999)
ALABAMA EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS Law Pub. 1999) (with T. Butts & C. Gamble)
Forensic Science: Extrapolation Testimony in Drunk Driving Prosecutions, 34 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 536 (Nov.-Dec. 1998)
The Rivalry Between Truth and Privilege: The Weakness of the Supreme Court's Instrumental Reasoning in Jaffee v. Redmond, 518 U.S. 1 (1996), 49 HASTINGS LAW JOURNAL 969 (1998)
IMWINKELRIED AND HALLAHAN'S CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE CODE ANNOTATED 1999, (West Group)
A Radical Approach to the Law of Impeachment: The Statutory Outer Limits, 22 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRIAL ADVOCACY 1 (1998)
VIRGINIA EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS Law Pub. 1998) (with K. Sinclair, J. Kearfott & P. Sheridan)
TEXAS EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS Law Pub. 2d ed. 1998) (with D. Schlueter, J. Onion & C. Barrow)
COURTROOM CRIMINAL EVIDENCE, (LEXIS 3d ed. 1998)(2 vols.) (with P. Giannelli, F. Gilligan & F. Lederer).
OBJECTIONS AT TRIAL, (LEXIS 3d. ed.1998) (with M. Bright, R. Carlson).
UNCHARGED MISCONDUCT: EVIDENCE, (West rev. ed. 1998) (2 vol.).
The Blockbuster Adams Decision, 34 TRIAL 26 (Oct. 1998)
Where There's Smoke, There's Fire: Should the Judge or the Jury Decide the Question of Whether the Accused Committed an Alleged Uncharged Crime Proffered Under Federal Rule of Evidence 404?, 42 ST. LOUIS UNIVERSITY LAW JOURNAL 813 (1998)
EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS Law Pub. 4th ed., 1998).
Cyberspace: The Newest Challenge for Traditional Legal Doctrine, 24 RUTGERS COMPUTER AND TECHNOLOGY LAW JOURNAL 305 (1998) (with Gilligan)
NORTH CAROLINA EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS Law Pub. 1998) (with R. Mosteller, D. Beskind & T. Ross)
Article V. Privileges, in EMERGING PROBLEMS UNDER THE FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (3d ed., 1998)
NEW YORK EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS Law Pub. 2d ed. 1998) (with R. Jonakait, H. Baer & E. Jones)
Forensic Science: A Primer on the Admissibility of Accident Reconstruction Testimony, 33 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 172 (Mar.-Apr. 1997)
Foreword, Symposium: International Perspectives on Scientific Evidence, 30 UC DAVIS LAW REVIEW 941 (1997)
The Supreme Court's Decision to Recognize a Psychotherapist Privilege in Jaffee v. Redmond, 116 S. Ct. 1923 (1996): The Meaning of "Experience" and the “Role of Reason” Under Federal Rule of Evidence 501, 65 UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI LAW REVIEW 1019 (1997) (with Amann)
Issues Once Moot: The Other Evidentiary Objections to the Admissibility of Exculpatory Polygraph Examinations, 32 WAKE FOREST LAW REVIEW 1045 (1997) (with McCall)
JEFFERSON'S CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE BENCH BOOK Chapters 35-38, 40, (3d ed. 1997 California Continuing Education of the Bar) (Editorial Board)
CRIMINAL EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS Law Pub. 1997) (with Blinka)
THE METHODS OF ATTACKING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, (Michie Publishing Co., 3d ed. 1997)
Evidentiary Heresy: Disregarding the Rules of Evidence at Trial!, 41 TRIAL LAWYER'S GUIDE 40 (1997)
Forensic Science: The Second Prong of the Daubert Test: Disturbing Implications of Two Recent Civil Cases, 33 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN 570 (Nov.-Dec. 1997)
The Next Step in Conceptualizing the Presentation of Expert Evidence as Education: The Case for Didactic Trial Procedures, 1 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE AND PROOF 128 (1997)
FEDERAL EVIDENCE TACTICS, (Matthew Bender 1997) (with David Schlueter)
CRIMINAL EVIDENCE, (West Publishing Co. 1979) (with P. Giannelli, F. Gilligan, and F. Lederer)
The Scope of Residual Hearsay Exceptions in the Federal Rules of Evidence, 15 SAN DIEGO LAW REVIEW 239 (1978)
EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (Michie Publishing Company, 1980)
EVIDENCE, (West 5th ed. 1999) (2 vols.) (with J. Strong, K. Broun, G. Dix, D. Kaye, R. Mosteller & R. Roberts, McCormick).
EVIDENCE: TEACHING MATERIALS FOR AN AGE OF SCIENCE AND STATUTES, (Michie 4th ed., 1997) (with Carlson, Kionka & Strachan).
EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE: THE ACCUSED'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO INTRODUCE FAVORABLE EVIDENCE, (Michie 2d ed., 1996) (with N. Garland).
MODERN LITIGATION AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY HANDBOOK, (Little, Brown & Co. 1996) (with W. Fortune & R. Underwood).
DYNAMICS OF TRIAL PRACTICE, (West 2d ed., 1995) (with R. Carlson).
EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (Michie 3d ed. 1995).
CALIFORNIA EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (Michie 2d ed., 1994) (with R. Wydick & J. Hogan).
MILITARY EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (Michie 1994) (with D. Schlueter, S. Saltzburg, & L. Schinasi).
COURTROOM CRIMINAL EVIDENCE, (Michie 2d ed., 1993) (with P. Giannelli, F. Gilligan & F. Lederer).
PRETRIAL DISCOVERY: THE DEVELOPMENT OF PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT, (Michie 1993) (with T. Blumoff & M. Johns).
EVIDENTIARY DISTINCTIONS: UNDERSTANDING THE FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE, (Michie 1993).
EVIDENCE IN THE NINETIES, (Michie 3d ed., 1991) (with R. Carlson & E. Kionka).
CONTRACT LAWSUITS: TRIAL STRATEGIES AND TECHNIQUES, (Michie 2d ed., 1989).
The Silence Speaks Volumes: A Brief Reflection on the Question of Whether It Is Necessary or Even Desirable to Fill the Seeming Gaps in Article VI of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Governing the Admissibility of Evidence Logically Relevant to the Witness's Credibility, 1998 ILLINOIS LAW REVIEW 1013 (1998)
Judicial Remedies for the Exposure of the Jury to 'Irrelevant' Evidence, 34 HOUSTON LAW REVIEW 73 (1997)
The Theory of "Unconscious Transference:" The Latest threat to the Shield Laws Protecting the Privacy of Victims of Sex Offenses, 38 BOSTON COLLEGE LAW REVIEW 107 (1996)
Moving Beyond 'Top Down' Grand Theories of Statutory Construction: A 'Bottom Up' Interpretive Approach to the Federal Rules of Evidence, 75 OREGON LAW REVIEW 389 (1996)
The Case Against Evidentiary Admissibility Standards That Attempt to ‘Freeze' the State of a Scientific Technique, 67 UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO LAW REVIEW 887 (1996)
Declarations Against Social Interest: The (Still) Embarrassingly Neglected Hearsay Exception, 69 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA LAW REVIEW 1427 (1996)
Evidence Law Visits Jurassic Park: The Far-Reaching Implications of the Daubert Court's Recognition of the Uncertainty of Scientific Enterprise, 71 IOWA LAW REVIEW 55 (1995)
Using a Contextual Construction to Resolve the Dispute over the Meaning of the Term ‘Plan' in Federal Rule Evidence 404(b), 43 UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS LAW REVIEW 1005 (1995)
The Meaning of 'Facts or Data' in Federal Rule of Evidence 703: The Significance of the Supreme Court's Decision to Rely on Federal Rule 702 in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Chemical Pharmaceutical, Inc., 54 MARYLAND LAW REVIEW 352 (1995)
People v. Ewoldt: The California Supreme Court's About-Face on the Plan Theory for Admitting Evidence of an Accused's Uncharged Misconduct, 28 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES LAW REVIEW 473 (1995)
Some Comments About Mr. David Karp's Remarks on Propensity Evidence, 70 CHICAGO-KENT LAW REVIEW 37 (1994)
An Hegelian Approach to Privileges Under Federal Rule of Evidence 501: The Restrictive Thesis, the Expansive Antithesis, and the Contextual Synthesis, 73 NEBRASKA LAW REVIEW 511 (1994)
The Next Step After Daubert: Developing a Similarly Epistemological Approach to Ensuring the Reliability of Nonscientific Expert Testimony, 15 CARDOZO LAW REVIEW 2271 (1994)
A Small Contribution to the Debate Over the Proposed Legislation Abolishing the Character Evidence Prohibition in Sex Offense Prosecutions, 44 SYRACUSE LAW REVIEW 1125 (1993)
A New Antidote for an Opponent's Pretrial Discovery Misconduct: Treating the Misconduct at Trial as an Admission by Conduct of the Weakness of the Opponent's Case, 1993 BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 793
The Educational Significance of the Syllogistic Structure of Expert Testimony, 87 NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 1148 (1993)
The Evolution of the Use of the Doctrine of Chances as Theory of Admissibility for Similar Fact Evidence, 22 ANGLO-AMERICAN LAW REVIEW 73 (1993)
The Worst Evidence Principle: The Best Hypothesis as to the Logical Structure of Evidence Law, 46 UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI LAW REVIEW 1069 (1992)
The Constitutionalization of Hearsay: The Extent to Which the Fifth and Sixth Amendments Permit or Require the Liberalization of the Hearsay Rules, 76 MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW 21 (1992)
A Comparativist Critique of the Interface Between Hearsay and Expert Opinion in American Evidence Law, 33 BOSTON COLLEGE LAW REVIEW 1 (1991)
Evidence Pedagogy in the Age of Statutes, 41 JOURNAL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 227 (1991)
The Recognition of an Accused's Constitutional Right to Introduce Expert Testimony Attacking the Weight of Prosecution Scientific Evidence: The Antidote for the Supreme Court's Mistaken Assumption in California v. Trombetta (with Scofield), 33 ARIZONA LAW REVIEW 59 (1991)
The Right to `Plead Out' Issues and Block the Admission of Prejudicial Evidence: The Differential Treatment of Civil Litigants and the Criminal Accused as a Denial of Equal Protection, 40 EMORY LAW JOURNAL 341 (1991)
On Achieving Synergy in the Law School Curriculum, 66 NOTRE DAME LAW REVIEW 739 (1991)
The Debate in the DNA Cases Over the Foundation For the Admission of Scientific Evidence: The Importance of Human Error as a Cause of Forensic Misanalysis, 69 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW QUARTERLY 19 (1991)
The Use of an Accused's Uncharged Misconduct to Prove Mens Rea: The Doctrines Which Threaten to Engulf the Character Evidence Prohibition, 51 OHIO STATE LAW JOURNAL 575 (1990)
The Case for Recognizing a New Constitutional Entitlement: The Right to Present Favorable Evidence in Civil Cases, 1990 UTAH LAW REVIEW 1
The Applicability of the Attorney-Client Privilege to Non-Testifying Experts: Reestablishing the Boundaries Between the Attorney-Client Privilege and the Work Product Protection, 68 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW QUARTERLY 19 (1990)
The Evolution of the American Test for the Admissibility of Scientific Evidence, 30 MEDICINE, SCIENCE, & LAW 60 (1990)
The Admissibility of Similar Facts Evidence in Civil Cases in the United Kingdom and the United States: The Need for Rethinking on Both Sides of the Atlantic, 9 LIVERPOOL LAW REVIEW 137 (1989)
The Education Philosophy of the Trial Practice Course: Reweaving the Seamless Web, 23 GEORGIA LAW REVIEW 663 (1989)
The Importance of the Memory Factor in Analyzing the Reliability of Hearsay Testimony: A Lesson Slowly Learnt--and Quickly Forgotten, 41 FLORIDA LAW REVIEW 215 (1989)
The 'Bases' of Expert Testimony: The Syllogistic Structure of Scientific Testimony, 67 NORTH CAROLINA LAW REVIEW 1 (1988)
The Meaning of Probative Value and Prejudice in Federal Rule of Evidence 403: Can Rule 403 Be Used to Resurrect the Common Law of Evidence?, 41 VANDERBILT LAW REVIEW 879 (1988)
The Worst Surprise of All: No Right to Pretrial Discovery of the Prosecution's Uncharged Misconduct Evidence, 56 FORDHAM LAW REVIEW 247 (1987)
Of Evidence and Equal Protection: The Unconstitutionality of Excluding Government Agents' Statements Offered as Vicarious Admissions Against the Prosecution, 71 MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW 269 (1986)
Science Take the Stand, 26 THE SCIENCES 20 (1986)
The Development of Professional Judgment in Law School Litigation Courses: The Concepts of Trial Theory and Theme, 39 VANDERBILT LAW REVIEW 59 (1986)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979): Reopening the Pandora's Box of the Legal Sufficiency of Drug Identification Evidence, 73 KENTUCKY LAW JOURNAL 1 (1985)
Judge Versus Jury: Who Should Decide Questions of Preliminary Facts Conditioning the Admissibility of Scientific Evidence?, 25 WILLIAM AND MARY LAW REVIEW 577 (1984)
UNCHARGED MISCONDUCT EVIDENCE, (Callaghan and Company 1984)
MATERIALS FOR THE STUDY OF EVIDENCE, (Michie Publishing Company 1983) (with R.Carlson and E. Kionka)
The Standard for Admitting Scientific Evidence: A Critique from the Perspective of Juror Psychology, 28 VILLANOVA LAW REVIEW 554 (1983)
Stipulations in Criminal Cases, 10 CRIMINAL DEFENSE 4 (May-June 1983) (with P. Giannelli)
THE METHODS OF ATTACKING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, (Michie Publishing Company 1982)
Forensic Hair Analysis: The Case Against the Underemployment of Scientific Evidence, 39 WASHINGTON & LEE LAW REVIEW 41 (1982)
The Use of Learned Scientific Treatises Under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(18), 18 TRIAL 56 (Feb. 1982)
A New Era in the Evolution of Scientific Evidence - A Primer on Evaluating the Weight of Scientific Evidence, 23 WILLIAM AND MARY LAW REVIEW 261 (1981)
Evidence Law and Tactics for the Proponents of Scientific Evidence, in SCIENTIFIC AND EXPERT EVIDENCE 33 (E. Imwinkelried, ed. 1981)
HANDBOOK FOR THE TRIAL OF CONTRACT LAWSUITS: STRATEGIES AND TECHNIQUES, (Prentice Hall 1981)
United States v. Payner and the Still Unanswered Questions About the Federal Courts' Supervisory Power Over Criminal Justice, 7 NATIONAL JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE 1 (1981)
A Sociological Approach to Legal Ethics, 30 AMERICAN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 349 (1981)
The Constitutionality of Introducing Evaluative Laboratory Reports Against Criminal Defendants, 30 HASTINGS LAW JOURNAL 621 (1979)
The Legacy of Greer v. Spock: The Public Forum Doctrine and the Principle of the Military's Political Neutrality, 65 GEORGETOWN LAW JOURNAL 773 (1977) (with Zillman)
Constitutional Rights and Military Necessity: Some Reflections on the Society Apart, 51 NOTRE DAME LAW REVIEW 296 (1976) (with Zillman)
An Evolution in the First Amendment: Overbreadth Analysis and Free Speech within the Military Community, 54 TEXAS LAW REVIEW 42 (1975) (with Zillman)
The Unconstitutional Burden of Article 15: A Rebuttal, 83 YALE LAW JOURNAL 524 (1974) (with Gilligan)
The Court of Military Appeals: A Survey of Recent Decisions, 62 MILITARY LAW REVIEW 115 (1974) (with Mullin)
Chambers v. Mississippi, __ U.S. __ (1973): The Constitutional Right to Present Defense Evidence, 62 MILITARY LAW REVIEW 225 (1973)
The Identification of Original, Real Evidence, 61 MILITARY LAW REVIEW 145 (1973)
The New Federal Rules of Evidence - Part IV, THE ARMY LAWYER (July 1973)
The New Federal Rules of Evidence - Part III, THE ARMY LAWYER (June 1973)
The New Federal Rules of Evidence - Part II, THE ARMY LAWYER (MAY 1973)
The New Federal Rules of Evidence - Part I, THE ARMY LAWYER (April 1973)
Military Justice - Trial Procedure, Department of the Army Pamphlet 27-173 (1973)
Comment, Substantive and Procedural Due Process in Union Disciplinary Proceedings, 3 UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO LAW REVIEW 389 (1969)
Comment, The Extent of the Obligations to Buy and Sell in Requirements Contracts, 3 UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO LAW REVIEW 99 (1968)
A New Threat to Plaintiff's Discovery Rights?, 33 TRIAL 36 (Sep. 1997)