SMITH

v.

OLSON

Citator

Cited By

• Bundy v. State, 471 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1985)
  …scientifically recognized danger of unreliability of such testimony outweighs its probative value as a matter of law, or for a combination of such reasons. See, e.g., People v. Shirley, 31 Cal.3d 18, 641 P. 2d 775, 181 Cal. Rptr. 243, cert. denied, 458 U.S. 1125, 103 [*14] S.Ct. 13, 73 L.Ed.2d 1400 (1982); People v. Gonzales, 415 Mich. 615, 329 N.W. 2d 743 (1982). We believe a discussion of the rationale underlying some of these particular decisions is warranted. In early 1981, the Arizona Supreme Court…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Pennsylvania v. Del. Valley Citizens' Council for Clean Air, 478 U.S. 546 (U.S. 1986)
  …h and several groups of Pennsylvania legislators attempted to intervene in the litigation. Delaware Valley successfully opposed all of these attempts. Delaware Valley Citizens’ Council for Clean Air v. Commonwealth, 674 F. 2d 970 (CA3), stay denied, 458 U. S. 1125 (1982). Phase VII. As noted above, a portion of the District Court’s contempt order prevented the United States Secretary of Transportation from authorizing the expenditure of any federal funds for federal highway projects in Pennsylvania that did…
• Bundy v. Florida, 479 U.S. 894 (U.S. 1986)
  …use of hypnotically refreshed testimony. Id., at 18. The court noted that the highest courts of several other States have categorically excluded hypnotically refreshed testimony. E. g., People v. Shirley, 31 Cal. 3d 18, 641 P. 2d 775, cert. denied, 458 U. S. 1125 (1982); People v. Gonzales, 415 Mich. 615, 329 N. W. 2d 743 (1982). The court discussed several of the problems associated with such testimony, not the least of which is [*896] its effect on the defendant’s right under the Confrontation Clause of th…