Evaluating and Admitting Expert Opinion Testimony in Child Sexual Abuse Prosecutions

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorYounts, D.
dc.date.accessioned2015-01-28T16:16:33Z
dc.date.available2015-01-28T16:16:33Z
dc.date.issued1991
dc.description.abstractRecent Research shows that much of the expert evidence offered by prosecutors in child sexual abuse trials is unreliable. The Issue of the reliability of expert evidence in child sexual abuse trials has already reached the Supreme Court, Which in Idaho v. Wright mandated that courts develop criteria of reliability to test expert evidence before admitting it in child sexual abuse trials when a defendant's Sixth Amendment Confrontation right is implicated. This Note provides courts guidelines for assessing the validity of an abuse investigation to determine when expert evidence from an investigative interview should be admissible. (Author Text)en_US
dc.identifier.citationYounts, D. (1991). Evaluating and Admitting Expert Opinion Testimony in Child Sexual Abuse Prosecutions. Duke Law Journal, 41, 691-739.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3175&context=dlj
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11212/2124
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherDuke Law Journalen_US
dc.subjectchild abuseen_US
dc.subjectchild sexual abuseen_US
dc.subjectexpertsen_US
dc.subjectcourten_US
dc.subjectlawen_US
dc.subjectguidelinesen_US
dc.titleEvaluating and Admitting Expert Opinion Testimony in Child Sexual Abuse Prosecutionsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

Collections

CALiO Collection of Resources