Edward J. Imwinkelried

Publications

• A Preemptive Strike Against the Misinterpretation of the 2023 Amendment to Federal Rule of Evidence 702(D): The Importance of Preserving the Requirement for a Showing That the Expert Has Properly Applied His or Her Methodology
  78 OKLA. L. REV. 367 (2026) · Oklahoma Law Review · 2026
• The Challenge that the Advent of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools Poses to the Procedures for Determining the Existence of the Preliminary Facts that Condition the Admissibility of Items of Evidence
  108 MARQ. L. REV. 621 (2025) · Marquette Law Review · 2025
• Viewing Federal Rules of Evidence 404(b) and 608(b) as Parts of the Same Legislative Scheme: The Tightening of Rule 404(b) Makes It the Right Time to Clarify Rule 608(b)
  92 FORDHAM L. REV. 2507 (2024) · Fordham Law Review · 2024
• The Adequacy of Filter Team Protocols to Protect Evidentiary Privileges During the Pretrial Stage
  84 LA. L. REV. (2024) · Louisiana Law Review · 2024
• Rigor or Reach? Strictness or Scope?: The Continuing Battle Over the Parameters of The Supreme Court’s Daubert/Kumho Reliability/Validation Test for the Admissibility of Expert Testimony
  89 MO. L. REV. (2024) · Missouri Law Review · 2024
• <em>State v. Gutierrez</em> Abolishing the Spousal Communications Privilege: An Opinion Raising Profound Questions About the Future of Evidentiary Privileges in the United States
  53 N. M. L. REV. 71 (2023) · New Mexico Law Review · 2023
• An Essay on Drafting Evidence Legislation and Rules: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom
  56 AKRON L. REV. (2023) · Akron Law Review · 2023
• Parsing Privilege: Does the Attorney–Client Privilege Attach to an Angry Client’s Criminal Threat Voiced During an Otherwise Privileged Attorney–Client Consultation?
  72 CASE W. RES. L. REV. 871 (2022) · Case Western Reserve Law Review · 2022
• Admitting Evidence of an Accused's Uncharged Misconduct Under the Doctrine of Objective Chances: Before a Judge May Consider Evidence of an Uncharged Incident to Decide Whether There Has Been a Suspicious Coincidence, Must the Accused Claim That the Incident Was an Accident?
  99 DENV. L. REV. 1 (2022) · Denver Law Review · 2022
• (Partial) Clarity: Eliminating the Confusion About the Regulation of the "Fact"ual Bases for Expert Testimony Under the Federal Rules of Evidence
  63 WM. & MARY L. REV. 719 (2022) · William & Mary Law Review · 2022
• A Brief Essay Defending the Doctrine of Objective Chances as a Valid Theory for Introducing Evidence of an Accused’s Uncharged Misconduct
  50 N. M. L. REV. 1 (2020) · New Mexico Law Review · 2020
• “Importing” Restrictions from One Federal Rule of Evidence Provision to Another: The Limits of Legitimate Contextual Interpretation in the Age of Statutes
  72 OKLA. L. REV. 231 (2020) · Oklahoma Law Review · 2020
• The Debate over the Permissibility of Selective Privilege Waiver Orders Under Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d): The Crucial Scope Issues
  73 SMU L. REV. 779 (2020) · SMU Law Review · 2020

• Tribute to Professor Paul Giannelli
  68 CASE W. RES. L. REV. 701 (2018) · Case Western Reserve Law Review · 2018
• A Brief Comment on the Response By Professors Findley and Risinger to My Original Contribution to Professor Risinger’s Symposium
  48 SETON HALL L. REV. (2018) · Seton Hall Law Review · 2018
• Debunked, Discredited, but Still Defended Revising State Post-Conviction Relief Statutes to Cover Convictions Resting on Subsequently Invalidated Expert Testimony
  48 SETON HALL L. REV. (2018) · Seton Hall Law Review · 2018
• Computer Source Code: A Source of the Growing Controversy Over the Reliability of Automated Forensic Techniques
  66 DEPAUL L. REV. (2017) · DePaul Law Review · 2017
• Criminal Minds: The Need to Refine the Application of the Doctrine of Objective Chances as a Justification for Introducing Uncharged Misconduct Evidence to Prove Intent
  45 HOFSTRA L. REV. (2017) · Hofstra Law Review · 2017
• The Effect of the Successful Assertion of the State Secrets Privilege in a Civil Lawsuit in Which the Government is Not a Party: When, If Ever, Should the Defendant Shoulder the Burden of the Government’s Successful Privilege Claim?
  16 WYO. L. REV (2016) · Wyoming Law Review · 2016
• Evidence of a Third Party's Guilt of the Crime that the Accused is Charged with: The Constitutionalization of the SODDI (Some Other Dude Did It) Defense 2.0
  47 LOY. U. CHI. L.J. 91 (2015) · Loyola University Chicago Law Journal · 2015
• Distinguishing Lay From Expert Opinion: The Need to Focus on the Epistemological Differences Between the Reasoning Process Used by Lay and Expert Witnesses
  68 SMU L. REV. 73 (2015) · SMU Law Review · 2015
• A Statute Overtaken by Time: The Need to Reinterpret Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8)(A)(iii) Governing the Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Government Investigative Reports.
  46 ST. MARY'S L.J. (2014) · St. Mary's Law Journal · 2014
• The Gordian Knot of the Treatment of Secondhand Facts under Federal Rule of Evidence 703 Governing the Admissibility of Expert Opinions: Another Conflict between Logic and Law
  3 U. DENV. CRIM. L. REV. (2013) · University of Denver Criminal Law Review · 2013
• Wading Into the Daubert Tide: Sargon Enterprises, Inc. v. University of Southern California
  64 UC L.J. 1665 (2013) · UC Law Journal · 2013
• The Epistemological Trend in the Evolution of the Law of Expert Testimony: A Scrutiny at Once Broader, Narrower, and Deeper
  47 GA. L. REV. (2013) · Georgia Law Review · 2013
• The Validity of the 2010 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 Amendment Governing the Waiver of Work Product Protection: Is the Work Product Doctrine an Evidentiary Privilege?
  37 U. DAYTON L. REV. (2012) · University of Dayton Law Review · 2012
• Serendipitous Timing: The Coincidental Emergence of the New Brain Science and the Advent of an Epistemological Approach to Determining the Admissibility of Expert Testimony
  62 MERCER L. REV. (2011) · Mercer Law Review · 2011
• Professor Margaret Berger, the Epitome of the Fully Engaged Scholar and Friend of the Court
  75 BROOK. L. REV. (2010) · Brooklyn Law Review · 2010
• My (Initial) Impressions of David Leonard
  43 LOY. L. A. L. REV. 739 (2010) · Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review · 2010

• Evidence Code Section 802: The Neglected Key to Rationalizing the California Law of Expert Testimony
  42 LOY. L. A. L. REV. 427 (2009) · Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review · 2009
• This is Like Deja vu All over Again: The Third, Constitutional, Attack on the Admissibility of Police Laboratory Reports in Criminal Cases
  38 N. M. L. REV. 303 (2008) · New Mexico Law Review · 2008
• The Case Against Abandoning the Search for Substantive Accuracy
  38 SETON HALL L. REV. (2008) · Seton Hall Law Review · 2008
• Clarifying the Curative Admissibility Doctrine: Using the Principles of Forfeiture and Deterrence to Shape the Relief for an Opponent's Evidentiary Misconduct
  76 FORDHAM L. REV. 1295 (2007) · Fordham Law Review · 2007
• The Alienability of Evidentiary Privileges: Of Property and Evidence, Burden and Benefit, Hearsay and Privilege
  80 ST. JOHN'S L. REV. (2007) · St. John's Law Review · 2007
• The Organization of the Evidence Course: The “Preliminaries” to Helping Students Develop the Skill of Identifying Nonhearsay
  50 ST. LOUIS U. L.J. (2006) · Saint Louis University Law Journal · 2006
• Waiver Raised to the Second Power: Waivers of Evidentiary Priviledges by Lawyers Representing Accused being Tried in Absentia
  56 S. C. L. REV. (2005) · South Carolina Law Review · 2005
• An Evidentiary Paradox: Defending the Character Evidence Prohibition by Upholding a Non-Character Theory of Logical Relevance, The Doctrine of Chances
  40 U. RICH. L. REV. 419 (2005) · University of Richmond Law Review · 2005
• A Psychological Critique of the Assumptions Underlying the Law of Evidentiary Privileges: Insights from the Literature on Self-Disclosure
  38 LOY. L. A. L. REV. 707 (2004) · Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review · 2004
• The Meaning of "Appropriate Validation" in Daubert - Interpreted in Light of the Broader Rationalist Tradition, not the Narrow Scientific Tradition
  30 FLA. ST. U. L. REV. (2003) · Florida State University Law Review · 2003
• Peer Dialogue: The How and What of Appropriate Validation under Daubert: Reconsidering the Treatment of Einstein and Freud
  68 MO. L. REV. (2003) · Missouri Law Review · 2003
• The Relativity of Reliability
  34 SETON HALL L. REV. (2003) · Seton Hall Law Review · 2003
• Can We Rely on the Alleged Constitutional Right to Informational Privacy to Secure Genetic Privacy in the Courtroom?
  31 SETON HALL L. REV. (2001) · Seton Hall Law Review · 2001
• DNA Typing: Emerging or Neglected Issues
  76 WASH. L. REV. 413 (2001) · Washington Law Review · 2001
• Keeping the Reformist Spirit Alive in Evidence Law
  149 U. PENN. L. REV. 1277 (2001) · University of Pennsylvania Law Review · 2001
• Reply Essay: A Final Comment--The Importance of the Procedural Framework
  50 CASE W. RES. L. REV. 669 (2000) · Case Western Reserve Law Review · 2000
• Evaluating the Reliability of Nonscientific Expert Testimony: A Partial Answer to the Questions Left Unresolved by Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael
  52 ME. L. REV. 19 (2000) · Maine Law Review · 2000
• Trial Judges: Gatekeepers or Usurpers? Can the Trial Judge Critically Assess the Admissibility of Expert Testimony Without Invading the Jury's Province to Evaluate the Credibility and Weight of the Testimony?
  84 MARQ. L. REV. 1 (2000) · Marquette Law Review · 2000
• Prejudice to the <i>N</i>th Degree: The Introduction of Uncharged Misconduct Admissible Only Against a Co-Defendant at a Megatrial
  53 OKLA. L. REV. 35 (2000) · Oklahoma Law Review · 2000

• Should the Courts Incorporate a Best Evidence Rule into the Standard Determining the Admissibility of Scientific Testimony: Enough is Enough Even When It Is Not the Best ?
  50 CASE W. RES. L. REV. 19 (1999) · Case Western Reserve Law Review · 1999
• Minnesota v. Philip Morris, Inc.: An Important Legal Ethics Message Which Neglects the Public Interest in Product Safety Research
  87 KY. L.J. (1999) · Kentucky Law Journal · 1999
• Whether the Federal Rules of Evidence Should be Conceived as a Perpetual Index Code: Blindness Is Worse Than Myopia
  40 WM. & MARY L. REV. 1595 (1999) · William & Mary Law Review · 1999
• The Rivalry between Truth and Privilege: The Weakness of the Supreme Court's Instrumental Reasoning in Jaffee v. Redmond, 518 U.S. 1 (1996)
  49 UC L.J. 969 (1998) · UC Law Journal · 1998
• The Daubert Decision on the Admissability of Scientific Evidence: The Supreme Court Chooses the Right Piece for All the Evidentiary Puzzles
  9 J. CIV. RTS. & ECON. DEV. (1997) · Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development · 1997
• The Case Against Evidentiary Admissibility Standards That Attempt To "Freeze" the State of a Scientific Technique
  67 U. COLO. L. REV. 887 (1996) · University of Colorado Law Review · 1996
• Developing a Coherent Theory of the Structure of Federal Rule of Evidence 703
  47 MERCER L. REV. (1996) · Mercer Law Review · 1996
• Coming to Grips with Scientific Research in <i>Daubert'</i> "Brave New World": The Courts' Need to Appreciate the Evidentiary Differences between Validity and Proficiency Studies
  61 BROOK. L. REV. 1247 (1995) · Brooklyn Law Review · 1995
• Undertaking the Task of Reforming the American Character Evidence Prohibition: The Importance of Getting the Experiment Off on the Right Foot
  22 FORDHAM URB. L.J. 285 (1995) · Fordham Urban Law Journal · 1995
• People v. Ewoldt: The California Supreme Court's About-Face on the Plan Theory for Admitting Evidence of an Accused's Uncharged Misconduct
  28 LOY. L. A. L. REV. 473 (1995) · Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review · 1995
• The Meaning of "Facts or Data" in Federal Rule of Evidence 703: the Significance of the Supreme Court's Decision to Rely on Federal Rule 702 in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
  54 MD. L. REV. 352 (1995) · Maryland Law Review · 1995
• The Next Step After <i>Daubert</i>: Developing a Similarly Epistemological Approach to Ensuring the Reliability of Nonscientific Expert Testimony
  15 CARDOZO L. REV. 2271 (1994) · Cardozo Law Review · 1994
• Some Comments about Mr. David Karp's Remarks on Propensity Evidence
  70 CHI.-KENT. L. REV. 37 (1994) · Chicago-Kent Law Review · 1994
• An Hegelian Approach to Privileges under Federal Rule of Evidence 501: The Restrictive Thesis, the Expansive Antithesis, and the Contextual Synthesis
  73 NEB. L. REV. (1994) · Nebraska Law Review · 1994
• A New Antidote for an Opponent's Pretrial Discovery Misconduct: Treating the Misconduct at Trial as an Admission by Conduct of the Weakness of the Opponent's Case
  1993 BYU L. REV. 793 (1993) · BYU Law Review · 1993
• The Admissibility of Expert Testimony in Christophersen v. Allied-Signal Corp.: The Neglected Issue of the Validity of Nonscientific Reasoning by Scientific Witnesses
  70 DENV. L. REV. 473 (1993) · Denver Law Review · 1993
• The Worst Evidence Principle: The Best Hypothesis as to the Logical Structure of Evidence Law
  46 U. MIAMI L. REV. 1069 (1992) · University of Miami Law Review · 1992
• The Constitutionalization of Hearsay: The Extent to Which the Fifth and Sixth Amendments Permit or Require the Liberalization of the Hearsay Rules
  76 MINN. L. REV. 521 (1992) · Minnesota Law Review · 1992
• On Achieving Synergy in the Law School Curriculum
  66 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 739 (1991) · Notre Dame Law Review · 1991
• The Debate in the DNA Cases Over the Foundation for the Admission of Scientific Evidence: The Importance of Human Error as a Cause of Forensic Misanalysis
  69 WASH. U. L. REV. 19 (1991) · Washington University Law Review · 1991
• The Application of the Attorney-Client Privilege to Non-Testifying Experts: Reestablishing the Boundaries Between the Attorney-Client Privilege and the Work Product Protection
  68 WASH. U. L. REV. 19 (1990) · Washington University Law Review · 1990

• The Importance of the Memory Factor in Analyzing the Reliability of Hearsay Testimony: A Lesson Slowly Learnt — and Quickly Forgotten
  41 FLA. L. REV. 215 (1989) · Florida Law Review · 1989
• The Bases of Expert Testimony: The Syllogistic Structure of Scientific Testimony
  67 N. C. L. REV. 1 (1988) · North Carolina Law Review · 1988
• The Meaning of Probative Value and Prejudice in Federal Rule of Evidence 403: Can Rule 403 Be Used to Resurrect the Common Law of Evidence?
  41 VAND. L. REV. 879 (1988) · Vanderbilt Law Review · 1988
• The Worst Surprise of All: No Right to Pretrial Discovery of the Prosecution's Uncharged Misconduct Evidence
  56 FORDHAM L. REV. 247 (1987) · Fordham Law Review · 1987
• The Development of Professional Judgment in Law School Litigation Courses: The Concepts of Trial Theory and Theme
  39 VAND. L. REV. 59 (1986) · Vanderbilt Law Review · 1986
• Of Evidence and Equal Protection: The Unconstitutionality of Excluding Government Agents' Statements Offered as Vicarious Admissions against the Prosecution
  71 MINN. L. REV. 269 (1986) · Minnesota Law Review · 1986
• Plan Theory for Admitting Evidence of the Defendant's Uncharged Crimes: A Microcosm of the Flaws in the Uncharged Misconduct Doctrine, The
  50 MO. L. REV. (1985) · Missouri Law Review · 1985
• The Need to Amend Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b): The Threat to the Future of the Federal Rules of Evidence
  30 VILL. L. REV. 1465 (1985) · Villanova Law Review (1956 - ) · 1985
• Jackson v. Virginia: Reopening the Pandora's Box of the Legal Sufficiency of Drug Identification Evidence
  73 KY. L.J. (1984) · Kentucky Law Journal · 1984
• Judge Versus Jury: Who Should Decide Questions of Preliminary Facts Conditioning the Admissibility of Scientific Evidence?
  25 WM. & MARY L. REV. 577 (1984) · William & Mary Law Review · 1984
• The Standard for Admitting Scientific Evidence: A Critique from the Perspective of Juror Psychology
  28 VILL. L. REV. 554 (1983) · Villanova Law Review (1956 - ) · 1983
• Forensic Hair Analysis: The Case Against The Underemployment Of Scientific Evidence
  39 WASH. & LEE L. REV. 41 (1982) · Washington and Lee Law Review · 1982
• A New Era in the Evolution of Scientific Evidence - A Primer on Evaluating the Weight of Scientific Evidence
  23 WM. & MARY L. REV. 261 (1981) · William & Mary Law Review · 1981

• The Constitutionality of Introducing Evaluative Laboratory Reports against Criminal Defendants
  30 UC L.J. 621 (1979) · UC Law Journal · 1979
• The Scope of the Residual Hearsay Exceptions in the Federal Rules of Evidence
  15 SAN DIEGO L. REV. 239 (1978) · San Diego Law Review · 1978
• Constitutional Rights and Military Necessity: Reflections on the Society Apart
  51 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 396 (1976) · Notre Dame Law Review · 1976
• The Unconstitutional Burden of Article 15: A Rebuttal
  83 YALE L.J. 534 (1974) · Yale Law Journal · 1974