These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

222 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9204639)

  • 1. Admissibility and per se exclusion of hypnotically elicited recall in American courts of law.
    Perry C
    Int J Clin Exp Hypn; 1997 Jul; 45(3):266-79. PubMed ID: 9204639
    [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. The admissibility of hypnotic evidence in U.S. Courts.
    Giannelli PC
    Int J Clin Exp Hypn; 1995 Apr; 43(2):212-33. PubMed ID: 7737764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Hypnosis with a criminal defendant and a crime witness: two recent related cases.
    Perry C; Laurence JR
    Int J Clin Exp Hypn; 1990 Oct; 38(4):266-82. PubMed ID: 2258244
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Rethinking per se exclusions of hypnotically elicited recall as legal testimony.
    Perry C; Orne MT; London RW; Orne EC
    Int J Clin Exp Hypn; 1996 Jan; 44(1):66-81. PubMed ID: 8582779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Rock v. Arkansas: hypnosis, the defendant's privilege.
    Orne MT; Dinges DF; Orne EC
    Int J Clin Exp Hypn; 1990 Oct; 38(4):250-65. PubMed ID: 2258243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Evaluating science outside the trial box: applying Daubert to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines' criminal history score.
    Krauss DA
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2006; 29(4):289-305. PubMed ID: 16530267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Rock v. Arkansas: a critique.
    Udolf R
    Int J Clin Exp Hypn; 1990 Oct; 38(4):239-49. PubMed ID: 2258242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Admissibility of scientific evidence post-Daubert.
    Masten J; Strzelczyk JJ
    Health Phys; 2001 Dec; 81(6):678-82. PubMed ID: 11725886
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 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. 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]  

  • 15. Neurolitigation: a perspective on the elements of expert testimony for extending the Daubert challenge.
    Klee CH; Friedman HJ
    NeuroRehabilitation; 2001; 16(2):79-85. PubMed ID: 11568465
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Psychological evidence at the dawn of the law's scientific age.
    Faigman DL; Monahan J
    Annu Rev Psychol; 2005; 56():631-59. PubMed ID: 15709949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Psychological expert witness testimony and judicial decision making trends.
    Shapiro DL; Mixon L; Jackson M; Shook J
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2015; 42-43():149-53. PubMed ID: 26341310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.