Computer-generated animations may be admissible as evidence in criminal trials, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has unanimously ruled in a case of first impression. "The difference is one of mode, not meaning," wrote Justice Sandra Schultz Newman in the lead opinion of Commonwealth v. Serge . "The law does not, and should not, prohibit proficient professional employment of new technology in the courtroom. This is, after all, the 21st century."
May 03, 2006 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
Computer-generated animations may be admissible as evidence in criminal trials, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has unanimously ruled in a case of first impression.
The six justices who participated in deciding Commonwealth v. Serge did not all agree as to how trial courts should approach admitting CGA evidence.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Join the industry's top owners, investors, developers, brokers & financiers at THE MULTIFAMILY EVENT OF THE YEAR!
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Lower Manhattan firm seeks a premises liability litigator (i.e., depositions, SJ motions, and/or trials) with at least 3-6 years of experien...
Join the Mendocino County District Attorney s Office and work in Mendocino County home to redwoods, vineyards and picturesque coastline. ...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
