Document Detail

Constitutional rights and hypnotically elicited testimony.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  10212035     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Despite the former popularity of hypnosis as a way of "improving" eyewitness memory, many courts almost always regard the use of this testimony to be inadmissible, whereas others allow it only when strict procedural guidelines have been followed. Although the U.S. Supreme Court recognized a defendant's constitutional right to admit his own hypnotically elicited testimony, others have recognized a constitutional basis to exclude hypnotically elicited testimony in most other circumstances.
A W Newman; J W Thompson
Related Documents :
24638825 - The impact of subjective recognition experiences on recognition heuristic use: a multin...
23774765 - Visual object pattern separation varies in older adults.
25071685 - On the use of continuous flash suppression for the study of visual processing outside o...
19775495 - Using the cambridge neuropsychological test automated battery (cantab) to assess the co...
18538915 - The neurocognitive basis of reading single words as seen through early latency erps: a ...
23124385 - The effect of individual differences in working memory capacity on sentence comprehensi...
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law     Volume:  27     ISSN:  1093-6793     ISO Abbreviation:  J. Am. Acad. Psychiatry Law     Publication Date:  1999  
Date Detail:
Created Date:  1999-06-08     Completed Date:  1999-06-08     Revised Date:  2004-11-17    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  9708963     Medline TA:  J Am Acad Psychiatry Law     Country:  UNITED STATES    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  149-54     Citation Subset:  IM    
Forensic Studies, Arkansas Mental Health Research and Training Institute, Little Rock, USA.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Civil Rights*
United States

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Developments in clergy malpractice: the case of Sanders v. Casa View Baptist Church.
Next Document:  Effects of dialysis membrane nature on intradialytic phagocytizing activity.