The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process
Abstract
This essay addresses the issue of judges deciding what scientific evidence is admissible. The primary focus is the admissibility of expert mental state testimony in criminal cases. The issue is addressed by answering two questions: 1) how does science work and 2) how does the brain work?
Recommended Citation
Erica Beecher-Monas and Edgar Garcia-Rill,
The Law and the Brain: Judging Scientific Evidence of Intent,
1 J. App. Prac. & Process 243
(1999).
Available at: https://lawrepository.ualr.edu/appellatepracticeprocess/vol1/iss2/4
COinS