Results 110 of 16 for "Amicus Brief"X related to "At the boundaries of cognition"
Results 110 of 16
Previous 1 2 Next Sort by:
  • 1.Floyd v. Cain
    Research and psychological science indicate that not every voluntary confession is true. The brief also addresses why innocent people confess and how voluntary false confessions are difficult for judges, juries and others to discern.
    Amicus Brief (May 2010)
  • 2.Commonwealth v. Walker
    APA filed an amicus brief urging the court to allow expert testimony on psychological research regarding eyewitness testimony, juror misunderstanding of the accuracy of eyewitness identification and the factors that can affect the accuracy of eyewitness identifications.
    Amicus Brief (August 2011)
  • 3.APA Amicus Briefs in Alphabetical Order
    Listing of the amicus briefs in alphabetical order, including topics such as sexual orientation, gays in the military, abortion and confidentiality.
    Amicus Brief
  • 4.Michigan v. Kowalski
    APA’s brief supports scientific research on false confessions provides a strong empirical foundation for the admission of expert testimony on the subject and that it should be admitted as evidence under the Daubert standard for expert testimony.
    Amicus Brief (September 2011)
  • 5.APA Amicus Briefs by Year
    Listing in reverse chronological order of APA amicus briefs, on subjects such as sexual orientation, psychotherapist-patient privilege and the death penalty. Each of the titles links to a one-page summary.
    Amicus Brief
  • 6.People v. Thomas
    At issue in the appeal is whether the State of New York should allow expert testimony on the body of research addressing risk factors for false confessions.
    Amicus Brief (November 2013)
  • 7.Hall v. Florida
    At issue in the appeal is whether a statutory definition of mental retardation that has a bright-line cutoff requiring an IQ score of 70 or below adequately captures the constitutional imperative that the “mentally retarded” not be executed.
    Amicus Brief (December 2013)
  • 8.U.S. v. Windsor
    At challenge is the constitutionality of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the section that defines the term "marriage," for all federal purposes, as "a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife," and thus requires the federal government to disregard marriages of same-sex couples.
    Amicus Brief (March 2013)
  • 9.Windsor v. U.S.
    At challenge is the constitutionality of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the section that defines the term 'marriage,' for all federal purposes, as "a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife" and thus requires the federal government to disregard marriages of same-sex couples.
    Amicus Brief (September 2012)
  • 10.Kitchen v. Herbert and Bishop v. Smith
    Involves a federal challenge to Utah and Oklahoma’s laws prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying and recognition of the legal marriage of same-sex couples who married in other states.
    Amicus Brief (March 2014)
Previous 1 2 Next Sort by:
ADVERTISEMENT
Results 110 of 16 for "Amicus Brief"X related to "At the boundaries of cognition"