Skip navigation

U.S. v. Toms, No. 97-3047 (D.C. Cir.) (136 F.3d 176) (February 27, 1998) (Judge Patricia M. Wald)

Although the Court observed that it has "several times" warned against the evils of mirroring hypothetical questions on the grounds that such questions constitute impermissible expert testimony about the defendant's mental state, the Court rejected the challenge made in this case, concluding (somehow) that it was clear that the expert's ...

 

Full article and associated cases available to subscribers.

As a digital subscriber to Punch and Jurists, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login