U.S. v. Allen, No. 1:01-CR-80 (N.D.Ind.) (208 F.Supp.2d 984) (June 19, 2002) (Judge William C. Lee)
Here, following its earlier ruling reported at 207 F.Supp.2d 856, the Court denied the defendant's motion in limine to exclude expert testimony regarding footwear impression evidence, holding that the methodology employed was sufficiently reliable.
The defendant was charged with bank burglary. In an earlier proceeding reported at 207 F.Supp.2d 856, ...
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.
Already a subscriber? Login