We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
PENNSYLVANIA STACKS THE DECK AGAINST DEFENDANTS IN COMMONWEALTH v. ALICIA, LEAVING FALSE CONFESSION ASSESSMENTS TO THE JURY.
- Authors
REAMY, KATHERINE
- Abstract
The article reports the decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in the case 'Commonwealth v. Alicia' in which the court held expert testimony on false confessions is inadmissible because it intrudes upon the jury's role as the sole assessor of credibility. Topics discussed include laws concerning expert testimony on false confessions; jury's role as the sole assessor of credibility; and Court's decision-making process in Alicia.
- Subjects
UNITED States; EXPERT evidence; FALSE confession lawsuits; PENNSYLVANIA. Supreme Court; LEGAL testimony
- Publication
Villanova Law Review, 2016, Vol 61, Issue 2, p321
- ISSN
0042-6229
- Publication type
Article