360 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21884119)
1. Forensic identification science evidence since Daubert: Part I--A quantitative analysis of the exclusion of forensic identification science evidence.
Page M; Taylor J; Blenkin M
J Forensic Sci; 2011 Sep; 56(5):1180-4. PubMed ID: 21884119
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Handwriting Evidence in Federal Courts - From Frye to Kumho.
Zlotnick J; Lin JR
Forensic Sci Rev; 2001 Jul; 13(2):87-99. PubMed ID: 26256304
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Forensic identification science evidence since Daubert: Part II--judicial reasoning in decisions to exclude forensic identification evidence on grounds of reliability.
Page M; Taylor J; Blenkin M
J Forensic Sci; 2011 Jul; 56(4):913-7. PubMed ID: 21729081
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Kumho, Daubert, and the nature of scientific inquiry: implications for forensic anthropology.
Grivas CR; Komar DA
J Forensic Sci; 2008 Jul; 53(4):771-6. PubMed ID: 18489550
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Ten years after Daubert: the status of the states.
Keierleber JA; Bohan TL
J Forensic Sci; 2005 Sep; 50(5):1154-63. PubMed ID: 16225224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Scientific inferences in the laboratory and the law.
Cranor C
Am J Public Health; 2005; 95 Suppl 1():S121-8. PubMed ID: 16030327
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Weakening forensic science in Spain: from expert evidence to documentary evidence.
Lucena-Molina JJ; Pardo-Iranzo V; Gonzalez-Rodriguez J
J Forensic Sci; 2012 Jul; 57(4):952-63. PubMed ID: 22329955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Trial and error: the Supreme Court's philosophy of science.
Haack S
Am J Public Health; 2005; 95 Suppl 1():S66-73. PubMed ID: 16030341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals: a new standard for scientific evidence in the courts?
Zonana H
Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1994; 22(3):309-25. PubMed ID: 7841504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. What has a decade of Daubert wrought?
Berger MA
Am J Public Health; 2005; 95 Suppl 1():S59-65. PubMed ID: 16030340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Quantitative EEG and the Frye and Daubert standards of admissibility.
Thatcher RW; Biver CJ; North DM
Clin Electroencephalogr; 2003 Apr; 34(2):39-53. PubMed ID: 12784902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Admissibility of scientific evidence in courts.
Davies J
Med Law; 2005 Jun; 24(2):243-57. PubMed ID: 16082863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The over-citation of Daubert in forensic anthropology.
Lesciotto KM; Christensen AM
J Forensic Sci; 2024 Jan; 69(1):9-17. PubMed ID: 37855082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Capillary electrophoresis in court: the landmark decision of the People of Tennessee versus Ware.
Marchi E; Pasacreta RJ
J Capillary Electrophor; 1997; 4(4):145-56. PubMed ID: 9627830
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Commentary on: Page M, Taylor J, Blenkin M. Forensic identification science evidence since Daubert: Part II--judicial reasoning in decisions to exclude forensic identification evidence on grounds of reliability. J Forensic Sci 2011;56(4):913-7.
Hart RP
J Forensic Sci; 2012 Jan; 57(1):278. PubMed ID: 22150396
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Commentary on: Page M, Taylor J, Blenkin M. Forensic identification science evidence since Daubert: Part I--a quantitative analysis of the exclusion of forensic identification science evidence. J Forensic Sci 2011;56(5):1180-4.
Mohammed LA; Singer K
J Forensic Sci; 2012 Jul; 57(4):1142; author reply 1143. PubMed ID: 22748154
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Application of the Supreme Court's Daubert criteria in radiation litigation.
Merwin SE; Moeller DW; Kennedy WE; Moeller MP
Health Phys; 2001 Dec; 81(6):670-7. PubMed ID: 11725885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The physician expert witness and the U.S. Supreme court--an epidemiologic approach.
Norton ML
Med Law; 2002; 21(3):435-49. PubMed ID: 12437195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Should human figure drawings be admitted into court?
Lally SJ
J Pers Assess; 2001 Feb; 76(1):135-49. PubMed ID: 11206294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
