In two decisions issued simultaneously last week, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court barred expert testimony on interrogation techniques that could lead to false confessions but overturned its longstanding tenet that expert testimony regarding the accuracy and reliability of eyewitness identification is per se impermissible.

The cases, entirely separate factually, were decided “in concert” to deal with issues of expert opinion, the court said.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]