Miller v. State
Indiana Supreme Court
1ConcurrenceBoehm, Justice
I concur in the majority opinion. I write separately to note that the admissibility of Dr. Ofshe's testimony under Indiana Evidence Rule 702 was not addressed by Miller or the State. Jurisdictions that have considered the admissibility of expert testimony as to false confessions under various versions of Evidence Rule 702 have split on that issue. Compare United States v. Shay, 57 F.3d 126 (1st Cir.1995); United States v. Holl, 974 F.Supp. 1198 (C.D.Ill.1997); Boyer v. Florida, - So.2d --, 2002 WL 925015 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. May 9, 2002) with People v. Son, 79 Cal.App.4th 224, 98 Cal.Rptr.2d 871…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United States v. ShayCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995
- United States v. HallDistrict Court, C.D. Illinois · 1997
- Boyer v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2002
- State v. FreeNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2002
- Black v. ArizalaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.