111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16789953)
1. The impact of DNA exonerations on the criminal justice system.
Berger MA
J Law Med Ethics; 2006; 34(2):320-7. PubMed ID: 16789953
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Crime and punishment.
Opar A
Nat Med; 2006 Oct; 12(10):1110-1. PubMed ID: 17024196
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Forensic science.
Giannelli PC
J Law Med Ethics; 2005; 33(3):535-44. PubMed ID: 16240733
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Who needs special needs? On the constitutionality of collecting DNA and other biometric data from arrestees.
Kaye DH
J Law Med Ethics; 2006; 34(2):188-98. PubMed ID: 16789942
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Allowing new technology to erode constitutional protections: a Fourth Amendment challenge to non-consensual DNA testing of prisoners.
Love SH
Villanova Law Rev; 1993; 38(5):1617-60. PubMed ID: 11653232
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. The (near) irrelevance of Daubert to criminal justice and some suggestions for reform.
Neufeld PJ
Am J Public Health; 2005; 95 Suppl 1():S107-13. PubMed ID: 16030325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. DNA evidence in rape cases and the Debbie Smith Act: forensic practice and criminal justice implications.
Telsavaara TV; Arrigo BA
Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol; 2006 Oct; 50(5):487-505. PubMed ID: 16943376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Supreme Court limits use of forced medications for criminal defendants.
Young D
Am J Health Syst Pharm; 2003 Aug; 60(15):1515-6. PubMed ID: 12951750
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Waiting for justice in an era of exonerations.
Watson C
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2014; 42(4):408-11. PubMed ID: 25492065
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. [Judicial intervention of the DNA test (comment on decisions of the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court No. 501/2005, of April 19, 2005, and No. 1311/2005, of October 14, 2005)].
Libano Beristain A
Rev Derecho Genoma Hum; 2005; (23):193-207. PubMed ID: 16628880
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Psychotropic medication in the criminal trial process: the constitutional and therapeutic implications of Riggins v. Nevada.
Winick BJ
N Y Law Sch J Hum Rights; 1993; 10(Part 3):637-709. PubMed ID: 16708427
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Two Supreme Court rulings provide mentally ill defendants new protections.
Greenhouse L
N Y Times Web; 1992 May; ():A14. PubMed ID: 11647929
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. When our eyes deceive us.
Lithwick D
Newsweek; 2009 Mar; 153(12):17. PubMed ID: 19413006
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The judicial side effects of involuntary medication as it relates to a criminal defendant's right to a fair trial: Riggins v. Nevada.
Gutierrez L
Thurgood Marshall Law Rev; 1994; 19(2):355-77. PubMed ID: 11660111
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Old law meets new medicine: revisiting involuntary psychotropic medication of the criminal defendant.
Siegel DM; Grudzinskas AJ; Pinals DA
Wis L Rev; 2001; 2():307-80. PubMed ID: 16281337
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. DNA analysis overturns the death sentence of a condemned criminal held in custody for 48 years.
Honda K
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2015 May; 16():e5-e6. PubMed ID: 25477025
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. [Legal reserve and other questions related to the use of DNA in criminal research (part I)].
Etxeberria Guridi JF
Rev Derecho Genoma Hum; 2007; (27):39-53. PubMed ID: 18330101
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. ACEs in the Criminal Justice System.
Garbarino J
Acad Pediatr; 2017; 17(7S):S32-S33. PubMed ID: 28865658
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Forensic DNA analysis and the United States Government.
Shapiro ED; Reifler S
Med Sci Law; 1996 Jan; 36(1):43-51. PubMed ID: 8907857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Genetic justice.
Rothstein MA
N Engl J Med; 2005 Jun; 352(26):2667-8. PubMed ID: 15987913
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
