Law and neuroscience in the United States

International Neurolaw: A Comparative Analysis

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 349-380

  Jones, Owen D ^a,b   Shen, Francis X ^c  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Law and Neuroscience   (United States)

^c TULANE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84929572361     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-21541-4_19     Document Type: Chapter

References (230)

1. Abrams K, Keren H. (2010). Who's afraid of law and the emotions?. Minn Law Rev 94:1997-2074
2. Aharoni E, Funk C, Sinnott-Armstrong W, Gazzaniga M. (2008). Can neurological evidence help courts assess criminal responsibility?. Lessons from law and neuroscience. Ann NY Acad Sci 1124:145-160
3. Alexander A. (2006). Functional magnetic resonance imaging lie detection: is a brainstorm heading toward the gatekeeper?. Houston J Health Law Pol 7:1-56
4. Allen v. Bloomfield Hills School District. (2008). 281 Mich App 49; 760 N.W.2d 811
5. Annas GJ. (2007). Foreword: imagining a new era of neuroimaging, neuroethics, and neurolaw. Am J Law Med 33:163-170
6. Appelbaum PS. (2007). The new lie detectors: neuroscience, deception, and the courts. Psychiatr Serv 58:460-462
7. Aronson JD. (2007). Brain imaging, culpability and the juvenile death penalty. Psychol Pub Pol Law 13:115-142
8. Aronson JD. (2009). Neuroscience and juvenile justice. Akron Law Rev 42:917-930
9. Aronson JD. (2010). The law's use of brain evidence. Annu Rev Law Soc Sci 6:93-108
10. Arrigo BA. (2007). Punishment, freedom, and the culture of control: the case of brain imaging and the law. Am J Law Med 33:457-482
11. Atkins v. Virginia. (2002). 536 U.S. 304
12. Baird AA. (2009). The developmental neuroscience of criminal behavior. In: Farahany NA (ed) The impact of behavioral sciences on criminal law. Oxford University Press, New York p. 81-123
13. Barkow RE. (2011). Federalism and criminal law: what the feds can learn from the states. Mich Law Rev 109:519-580
14. Barth AS. (2007). A double-edged sword: the role of neuroimaging in federal capital sentencing. Am J Law Med 33:501-522
15. Baskin JH, Edersheim JG, Price BH. (2007). Is a picture worth a thousand words?. Neuroimaging in the courtroom. Am J Law Med 33:239-269
16. Bazan EB. (2005). Capital punishment: an overview of federal death penalty statutes. CRS Report for Congress RL30962
17. Beecher-Monas E, Garcia-Rill E. (2003). Danger at the edge of chaos: predicting violent behavior in a post-daubert world. Cardozo Law Rev 24:1845-1901
18. Bennett CM, Baird AA, Miller MB, Wolford GL. (2010). Neural correlates of interspecies perspective taking in the post-mortem atlantic salmon: an argument for multiple comparisons correction. J Serend Unexpect Result 1:1-5
19. Berman DA, Bibas S. (2008). Engaging capital emotions. Nw Univ Law Rev Colloquy 102:355-364
20. Bernstein DM, Loftus EF. (2009). How to tell if a particular memory is true or false. Perspect Psychol Sci 4:370-374
21. Bizzi E, Hyman SE, Raichle ME, Kanwisher N, Phelps EA, Morse SJ, Sinnott-Armstrong W, Rakoff JS, Greely HT. (2009). Using imaging to identify deceit: scientific and ethical questions. Am Acad Art Sci. http://www.amacad.org/pdfs/deceit.pdf
22. Blitz MJ. (2010). Freedom of thought for the extended mind: cognitive enhancement and the constitution. Wisconsin Law Rev 2010:1049-1117
23. Blumoff TY. (2010). How (some) criminals are made. In: Freeman M (ed) Law and neuroscience: current legal issues. Oxford University Press, New York p. 171-192
24. Bonnie RJ. (2002). Responsibility for addiction. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 30:405-413
25. Borden S. (2011). Concussion suit seeks better health monitoring, New York Times, 20 August 2011
26. Borg JS, Hynes C, Van Horn J, Grafton S, Sinnott-Armstrong W. (2006). Consequences, action, and intention as factors in moral judgments: an fMRI investigation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 18:803-817
27. Boyd v. Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Players Retirement Plan. (2005). 410 F.3d 1173
28. Brown T, Murphy E. (2010). Through a scanner darkly: functional neuroimaging as evidence of a criminal defendant's past mental states. Stan Law Rev 62:1119-1208
29. Buckholtz JW, Asplund CL, Dux PE, Zald DH, Gore JC, Jones OD, Marois R. (2008). The neural correlates of third-party punishment. Neuron 60:930-940
30. Cacioppo JT, Berntson GG, Lorig TS, Norris CJ, Rickett E, Nusbaum H. (2003). Just because you're imaging the brain doesn't mean you can stop using your head: a primer and set of first principles. J Pers Soc Psychol 85:650-661
31. Caldwell MF, Skeem J, Salekin R, Van Rybroek GJ. (2006). Treatment response of adolescent offenders with psychopathy features: a 2-year follow-up. Crim Just Behav 33:571-596
32. Caldwell MF, McCormick DJ, Umstead D, Van Rybroek GJ. (2007). Evidence of treatment progress and therapeutic outcomes among adolescents with psychopathic features. Crim Just Behav 34:573-587
33. Chorvat T, McCabe K. (2004). The brain and the law. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 359:1727-1736
34. Coe V. State. (2000). 17 S.W.3d 193
35. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993). 509 U.S. 579
36. Davis KC. (1942). An approach to problems of evidence in the administrative process. Harv Law Rev 55:364-425
37. Denno DW. (2002). Crime and consciousness: science and involuntary acts. Minn Law Rev 87:269-389
38. Droback JA. (2006). Developing capacity: adolescent consent at work, at law, and in the sciences of the mind. UC Davis J Juv Law Pol 10:1-68
39. Eagleman DM. (2008). Neuroscience and the law. Houston Lawyer 16:36-40
40. Entertainment Software Ass'n. v. Blagojevich. (2005). 404 F. Supp. 2d 1051
41. Erickson SK. (2010). Blaming the brain. Minn J Law Sci Tech 11:27-77
42. Faigman DL. (2002). Is science different for lawyers?. Science 297:339-340
43. Faigman DL. (2010). Evidentiary incommensurability: a preliminary exploration of the problem of reasoning from general scientific data to individualized legal decision-making. Brooklyn Law Rev 75:1115-1136
44. Faigman DL, Kaye DH, Saks MJ, Sanders J. (2011). Modern scientific evidence: the law and science of expert testimony, 2010-2011 edn. West Publishing Co., New York
45. Farah MJ. (2002). Emerging ethical issues in neuroscience. Nat Neurosci 11:1123-1129
46. Farah MJ. (2005). Neuroethics: the practical and the philosophical. Trends Cognitive Sci 9:34-40
47. Farah MJ, Illes J, Cook-Deegan R, Gardner H, Kandel E, King P, Parens E, Sahakian B, Wolpe PR. (2004). Neurocognitive enhancement: what can we do and what should we do?. Neuroscience 5:421-425
48. Farahany NA, Coleman JE, Jr. (2009). Genetics, neuroscience, and criminal responsibility. In: Farahany NA (ed) The impact of behavioral sciences on criminal law. Oxford University Press, New York p. 183-240
49. Farahany NA. (2009a). Cruel and unequal punishments. Wash Univ Law Rev 86:859-915
50. Farahany NA (ed). (2009b). The impact of behavioral sciences on criminal law. Oxford University Press, New York
51. Farahany NA. (2011). An empirical study of brains and genes in U.S. Criminal Law, Vanderbilt University Law School
52. Feigenson N. (2006). Brain imaging and courtroom evidence: on the admissibility and persuasiveness of fMRI. Int J Law Context 2:233-255
53. Ferrell v. State. (2005). 918 So.2d 163
54. Fini v. General Motors Corp. (2003). 2003 WL 1861025 (Mich. App
55. Fox D. (2008). Brain imaging and the bill of rights: memory detection technologies and American criminal justice. Am J Bioethics 8:1-4
56. Fox D. (2009). The right to silence as protecting mental control. Akron Law Rev 42:763-801
57. Freeman M, Goodenough OR (eds). (2009). Law, mind, and brain. Ashgate, Surrey, England
58. Freeman M (ed). (2011). Law and neuroscience: current legal issues volume 13. Oxford University Press, Oxford
59. Frye v. United States. (1923). 293 F. 1013
60. Ganis G, Keenan JP. (2009). The cognitive neuroscience of deception. Soc Neurosci 4:465-472
61. Garland B (ed). (2004). Neuroscience and the law: brain, mind, and the scales of justice. Dana Press, New York
62. Garland B, Glimcher PW. (2006). Cognitive neuroscience and the law. Curr Opin Neurobiol 16:130-134
63. Gazzaniga MS. (2008). The law and neuroscience. Neuron 60:412-415
64. Gazzaniga MS, Ivry RB, Mangum GR. (2009). Cognitive neuroscience: the biology of the mind. 3rd edn. W.W. Norton & Company, New York
65. Gehrman E. (2007). From neuroscience to childhood policy. 7 December 2007. http://news.harvard. edu/gazette/story/2007/12/from-neuroscience-to-childhood-policy/General Electric Co. v. Joiner. (1997). 522 U.S. 136
66. Gillet GR. (2009). The subjective brain, identity, and neuroethics. Am J Bioethics 9:5-13
67. Goodenough OR. (2001). Mapping cortical areas associated with legal reasoning and moral intuition. Jurimetrics J 41:429-442
68. Goodenough OR, Tucker M. (2010). Law and cognitive neuroscience. Annu Rev Law Soc Sci 6:61-92
69. Graham v. Florida. (2010). 130 S.Ct. 2011
70. Greely HT. (2004). Prediction, litigation, privacy, and property: some possible legal and social implications of advances in neuroscience. In: Garland B (ed) Neuroscience and the law: brain, mind, and the scales of justice. Dana Press, New York p. 114-156
71. Greely HT. (2006). Neuroethics and ELSI: similarities and differences. Minn J Law Sci Tech 7:599-614
72. Greely HT, Illes J. (2007). Neuroscience-based lie detection: the urgent need for regulation. Am J Law Med 33:377-431
73. Greely HT, Sahakian B, Harris J, Kessler RC, Gazzaniga M, Campbell P, Farah MJ. (2008). Towards responsible use of cognitive-enhancing drugs by the healthy. Nature 456:702-705
74. Greely HT, Wagner AD (Forthcoming) Reference guide on neuroscience. In: Federal judicial center reference manual on scientific evidence, 3rd edn., Federal Judicial Center, Washington, DC
75. Greene J, Cohen J. (2004). For the law, neuroscience changes nothing and everything. Phil Trans Royal Soc B Biol Sci 359:1775-1785
76. Greene J, Haidt J. (2002). How (and where) does moral judgment work?. Trends Cogn Sci 6:517-523
77. Greene JD, Paxton JM. (2009). Patterns of neural activity associated with honest and dishonest moral decisions. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106:12506-12511
78. Grey BJ. (2011). Neuroscience and emotional harm in tort law: rethinking the American approach to free-standing emotional distress claims. In: Freeman M (ed) Law and neuroscience. Oxford University Press, New York p. 203-230
79. Gruber SA, Yurgelun-Todd DA. (2006). Neurobiology and the law: a role in juvenile justice?. Ohio St J Crim Law 3:321-340
80. Hafemeister TL, Stockey NA. (2010). Last stand?. the criminal responsibility of war veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan with posttraumatic stress disorder. Ind Law J 85:87-141
81. Haider A. (2006). Roper v Simmons: the role of the science brief. Ohio St J Crim Law 3:369-377
82. Haidt J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: a social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychol Rev 108:814-834
83. Halliburton CM. (2007). Letting Katz out of the bag: cognitive freedom and fourth amendment fidelity. Hastings Law J 59:309-368
84. Hariri AR. (2009). The neurobiology of individual differences in complex behavioral traits. Annu Rev Neurosci 32:225-247
85. Harrington v. State. (2003). 659 N.W.2d 509
86. Hawkins Hon MD. (2010). Coming home: accommodating the special needs of military veterans to the criminal justice system. Ohio St J Crim Law 7:563-573
87. Hora PF, Stalcup T. (2008). Drug treatment courts in the twenty-first century: the evolution of the revolution in problem-solving courts. Georgia L Rev 42:717-811
88. Hughes V. (2010). Science in court: head case. Nature 464:340-342
89. Illes J. (2003). Neuroethics in a new era of neuroimaging. AJNR 24:1739-1741
90. Illes J (ed). (2006). Neuroethics: defining the issues in theory, practice, and policy. Oxford University Press, New York
91. Illes J, Sahakian BJ, eds. (2011). Oxford handbook of neuroethics. Oxford University Press, New York
92. Jones OD. (1999). Law, emotions, and behavioral biology. Jurimetrics 39:283-289
93. Jones OD. (2004). Law, evolution and the brain: applications and open questions. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 359:1697-1707
94. Jones OD, Buckholtz JW, Schall JD, Marois R. (2009). Brain imaging for legal thinkers: a guide for the perplexed. Stan Tech Law Rev 2009:5-53
95. Jones OD, Schall JD, Shen FX (Forthcoming) Law and neuroscience. Aspen Publishers, New York
96. Kahan DM. (2008). Two conceptions of emotion in risk regulation. Univ Penn Law Rev 156:741-766
97. Katner DR. (2006). The mental health paradigm and the MacArthur study: emerging issues challenging the competence of juveniles in delinquency systems. American Journal of Law and Medicine 32:503-583
98. Kennedy D. (2004). Neuroscience and neuroethics. Science 306:373
99. Kensinger EA, Schacter DL. (2006). When the Red Sox shocked the Yankees: comparing negative and positive memories. Psychon Bull Rev 13:757-763
100. Kiehl KA. (2006). A cognitive neuroscience perspective on psychopathy: evidence for paralimbic system dysfunction. Psychiatry Res 142:107-128
101. Kiehl KA. (2008). Without morals: the cognitive neuroscience of criminal psychopaths. In: Sinnott- Armstrong W (ed) Moral psychology. Vol. 3. The MIT Press, Cambridge p. 119-149
102. Kiehl KA, Hoffman MB (Forthcoming) The criminal psychopath: history, neuroscience, treatment, and economics. Jurimetrics
103. Kluger J. (2011). Football searches for the cause of another tragedy. TIME Magazine. February 23, 2011
104. Knabb JJ, Welsh RK, Ziebell JG, Reimer KS. (2009). Neuroscience, moral reasoning, and the law. Behav Sci Law 27:219-236
105. Koenigs M, Young L, Adolphs R, Tranel D, Cushman F, Hauser M, Damasio A. (2007). Damage to the prefrontal cortex increases utilitarian moral judgements. Nature 446:908-911
106. Kolber AJ. (2006). Therapeutic forgetting: the legal and ethical implications of memory dampening. Vand Law Rev 59:1561-1626
107. Kolber AJ. (2007). Pain detection and the privacy of subjective experience. Am J Law Med 33:433-456
108. Kolber AJ. (2011). The experiential future of the law. Emory Law Journal 60: 585-652
109. Kulynych JJ. (2007). The regulation of MR neuroimaging research: disentangling the Gordian knot. Am J Law Med 33:295-317
110. Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael. (1999). 526 U.S. 137
111. Loftus EF. (2005). Planting misinformation in the human mind: a 30-year investigation of the malleability of memory. Learn Mem 12:361-366
112. Logothetis NK. (2008). What we can do and what we cannot do with fMRI. Nature 453: 869-878
113. Marchant G. (2008). Brain scanning and the courts: criminal cases. Presentation to the Research Network on Legal Decision Making, MacArthur Foundation Law and Neuroscience Project, 11 Oct 2008
114. Marks JH. (2007). Interrogational neuroimaging in counterterrorism: a No-Brainer or a human rights hazard?. Am J Law Med 33:483-500
115. Maroney TA. (2006). Law and emotion: a proposed taxonomy of an emerging field. Law Hum Behav 30:119-142
116. Maroney TA. (2010). The false promise of adolescent brain science in juvenile justice. Notre Dame Law Rev 85:89-176
117. Martell DA. (1996). Causal relation between brain damage and homicide: the prosecution. Semin Clin Neuropsychiatry 1:184-193
118. McCabe DP, Castel AD. (2008). Seeing is believing: the effect of brain images on judgments of scientific reasoning. Cognition 107:343-352
119. McCabe DP, Castel AD, Rhodes MG. (2011). The influence of fMRI lie detection evidence on juror decision making. Behav Sci Law 29:566-577
120. McMurtey v. Ryan. (2008). 539 F.3d 1112 (9th Cir. 2008).
121. Meilaender G. (2003). Why remember?. First Things 135:20-24
122. Meszaros J. (2011). Achieving peace of mind: the benefits of neurobiology evidence for battered women defendants. Yale J Law Femin 23:117-177
123. Miller FG, Mello MM, Jaffe S. (2008). Incidental findings in human subjects research: what do investigators owe research participants?. J Law Med Ethics 36:271-279
124. Milner B, Squire LR, Kandel ER. (1998). Cognitive neuroscience and the study of memory. Neuron 20:445-453
125. Mobbs D, Lau HC, Jones OD, Frith CD. (2007). Law, responsibility, and the brain. PLoS Biol 5:693-700
126. Mobley v. The State. (1995). 265 Ga. 292
127. Monahan J. (2006). A jurisprudence of risk assessment: forecasting harm among prisoners, patients, and patients. Va Law Rev 92:391-435
128. Moreno JD. (2003). Neuroethics: an agenda for neuroscience and society. Nat Rev Neurosci 2:149-153
129. Moriarty JC. (2008). Flickering admissibility: neuroimaging evidence in the U.S. courts. Behav Sci Law 26:29-49
130. Moriarty JC. (2009). Visions of deception: neuroimages and the search for truth. Akron Law Rev 42:739-761
131. Morse SJ. (1996). Brain and blame. Geo Law J 84:527-546
132. Morse SJ. (2006). Brain overclaim syndrome and criminal responsibility: a diagnostic note. Ohio St J Crim Law 3:397-412
133. Morse SJ, Hoffman MB. (2007). The uneasy entente between legal insanity and mens rea: beyond Clark v. Arizona
134. Morse SJ. (2008a). Psychopathy and criminal responsbility. Neuroethics 1:205-212
135. Morse SJ. (2008b). Determinism and the death of folk psychology: two challenges to responsibility from neuroscience. Minn. J.L. Sci. & Tech. 9:1-35
136. Morse SJ, Roskies AL, eds. (Forthcoming) MacArthur primer on law & neuroscience. Oxford University Press, New York
137. Nadel L, Sinnott-ArmstrongW. (2010). Conscious will and responsibility. Oxford University Press, New York
138. Nadelhoffer T, Bibas S, Grafton S, Kiehl KA, Mansfield A, Sinnott-Armstrong W, Gazzaniga MS. (2010). Neuroprediction, violence, and the law: setting the stage. Neuroethics. doi:10.1007/s12152-010-9095-z: 1-33
139. National Research Council. (2003). The polygraph and lie detection: executive summary
140. New JG. (2008). If you could read my mind: implications of neurological evidence for twenty-first century criminal jurisprudence. J Legal Med 29:179-198
141. O'Hara EA. (2004). How neuroscience might advance the law. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 359:1677-1684
142. Oregon v. Kinkel. (2002). 56 P.3d 463
143. Ovalle D. (2010). Miami-Dade killer gets life sentence for murder, stabbings, rape. Miami Herald, 2 December 2010
144. Pardo MS, Patterson D. (2010). Philosophical foundations of law and neuroscience. Univ Illinois Law Rev 2010:1211-1250
145. Patel P, Levine K, Mayberg H, Meltzer C. (2007). The role of imaging in United States courtrooms. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 17:557-567
146. People v. Goldstein. (2004). 786 N.Y.S.2d 428
147. People v. Morgan. (1999). 719 N.E.2d 681 (Ill. 1999
148. People v. Weinstein. (1992). 591 N.Y.S.2d 715
149. Petersilia J. (2003). When prisoners come home: parole and prisoner reentry. Oxford University Press, New York
150. Pettit Jr M. (2007). fMRI and BF meet FRE: brain imaging and the federal rules of evidence. Am J Law Med 33:319-340
151. Phelps EA. (2004). Human emotion and memory: interactions of the amygdala and hippocampal complex. Curr Opin Neurobiol 14:198-202
152. Poldrack RA, Fletcher PC, Henson RN, Worsley KJ, Brett M, Nichols TE. (2008). Guidelines for reporting an fMRI study. NeuroImage 40:409-414
153. Posner EA. (2000). Law and the emotions. Geo Law J 89:1977-2012
154. Powell v. State of Texas. (1968). 392 U.S. 514
155. President's Council on Bioethics. (2003). Beyond therapy: biotechnology and the pursuit of happiness. Regan Books, New York
156. Purves D, Brannon EM, Cabeza R, Huettel SA, LaBar KS, Platt ML, and Woldorff MG. (2008). Principles of cognitive neuroscience. Sinauer, Sunderland
157. Pustilnik AC. (2009). Violence on the brain: a critique of neuroscience in criminal law. Wake Forest Law Rev 44:183-237
158. Racine E, Bar-Ilan O, Illes J. (2005). fMRI in the public eye. Nat Rev Neurosci 6:159-164
159. Rakoff J. (2008). Science and the law: uncomfortable bedfellows. Seton Hall Law Rev 38:1379-1393
160. Redding RE. (2006). The brain-disordered defendant: neuroscience and legal insanity in the twentyfirst century. Am Univ Law Rev 56:51-127
161. Relkin N, Plum F, Mattis S, Eidelberg D, Tranel D. (1996). Impulsive homicide associated with an arachnoid cyst and unilateral frontotemporal cerebral dysfunction. Semin Clin Neuropsychiatry 1:172-183
162. Richardson HS. (2008). Incidental findings and ancillary-care obligations. J Law Med Ethics 36:256-270
163. Rissman J, Greely H, Wagner AD. (2010). Detecting individual memories through the neural decoding of memory states and past experience. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107:9849-9854
164. Robinson v. State of California. (1962). 370 U.S. 660
165. Rogers KG, DuBois A. (2009). The present and future impact of neuroscience evidence on criminal law. APR Champion 33:18-23
166. Rojas-Burke J. (1993). PET scans advance as tools in insanity defense. J Nuclear Med 34:13N-26N
167. Roper v. Simmons. (2005). 543 U.S. 551
168. Rosen J. (2007). The brain on the stand. New York Times Sunday Magazine, 11 March 2007
169. Roskies A. (2002). Neuroethics for the new millennium. Neuron 35:21-23
170. Roskies A. (2008). Neuroimaging and inferential distance. Neuroethics 1:19-30
171. Russell RT. (2009). Veterans treatment court: a proactive approach. N Eng J Crim Civ Confinement 35:357-372
172. Saks MJ. (2000). The aftermath of Daubert: an evolving jurisprudence of expert evidence. Jurimetrics J 40:229-241
173. Salerno JM, Bottoms BL. (2009). Emotional evidence and jurors' judgments: the promise of neuroscience for informing psychology and law. Behav Sci Law 27:273-296
174. Sapolsky R. (2004). The frontal cortex and the criminal justice system. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 359:1787-1796
175. Schacter DL. (2002). The seven sins of memory: how the mind forgets and remembers. Mariner Books, New York
176. Schacter DL, Slotnick SD. (2004). The cognitive neuroscience of memory distortion. Neuron 44:149-160
177. Schauer F. (2010). Can bad science be good evidence?. Lie detection, neuroscience and the mistaken conflation of legal and scientific norms. Cornell Law Rev 95:1191-1220
178. Schleim S, Spranger TM, Erk S, Walter H. (2010). From moral to legal judgment: the influence of normative context in lawyers and other academics. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci 6:48-57
179. Schwarz A. (2010). Case will test NFL teams' liability in dementia. New York Times, 5 April 2010
180. Schweitzer NJ, Saks M, Murphy E, Roskies A, Sinnott-Armstrong W, Gaudet L. (2011). Neuroimages as evidence in a mens rea defense: no impact. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 17:357-392
181. Schweitzer NJ, Saks M. (2011). Neuroimage evidence and the insanity defense. Behavioral Sciences & the Law 29:592-607
182. Scott ES, Steinberg L. (2008). Rethinking juvenile justice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
183. Sharot T, Martorella EA, Delgado MR, Phelps EA. (2007). How personal experience modulates the neural circuitry of memories of September 11. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104:389-394
184. Shen FX. (2010). Monetizing memory science: neuroscience and the future of PTSD litigation. Paper presented at the Memory and Law Conference, Tucson Arizona, January 2010
185. Shen FX. (2010). The law and neuroscience bibliography: navigating the emerging field of neurolaw. International Journal of Legal Information 38:352-399
186. Shen FX, Jones OD. (2011). Brain scans as evidence: truths, proofs, lies, and lessons. Mercer L. Rev 62:861-884
187. Simon D. (2011). The limited diagnosticity of criminal trials. Vanderbilt Law Rev 64:143-223
188. Simpson JR. (2008). Functional MRI lie detection: too good to be true?. J Am Acad Psychiatry law 36:491-498
189. Sinnott-Armstrong W, Roskies A, Brown T, Murhpy E. (2008). Brain images as legal evidence. Episteme 5:359-373
190. Sip KE, Roepstorff A, McGregor W, Frith CD. (2007). Detecting deception: the scope and limits. Trend Cogn Sci 12:48-53
191. Smith DM. (2009). The disordered and discredited plaintiff: psychiatric evidence in civil litigation. Cardozo Law Rev 31:757-771
192. Snead OC. (2006). Neuroimaging and the courts: standard and illustrative case index. http://www. ncsconline.org/d-research/stl/June06/Snead.doc. Accessed 15 July 2010
193. Snead OC. (2007). Neuroimaging and the complexity of capital punishment. NY Univ Law Rev 82:1265-1339
194. SousaD. (2009). Howbrain science can make you a better lawyer.AmericanBarAssociation, Chicago
195. Squire LR. (2004). Memory systems of the brain: a brief history and current perspective. Neurobiol Learn Mem 82:171-177
196. State v. Nelson. (2010). 11th Fl Cir. Ct., F05-846
197. Stoller SE, Wolpe PR. (2007). Emerging neurotechnologies for lie detection and the fifth amendment. Am J Law Med 33:359-375
198. Stone AA. (1993). Posttraumatic stress disorder and the law: critical review of the new frontier. Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law 21:23-36
199. Stuntz WJ. (2008). Unequal justice. Harv Law Rev 121:1969-2040
200. Tancredi LR, Brodie JD. (2007). The brain and behavior: limitations in the legal use of functional magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Law Med 33:271-294
201. Taylor J. (1995). Neurolaw: towards a new medical jurisprudence. Brain Inj 9:745-751
202. Taylor E. (2006). A new wave of police interrogation?. Brain fingerprinting, the constitutional privilege against self-incrimination, and hearsay jurisprudence. Univ Illinois J Law Technol Pol 2006:287-312
203. Tovino SA. (2005). The confidentiality and privacy implications of functional magnetic resonance imaging. J Law Med Ethics 33:844-848
204. Tovino SA. (2007a). Functional neuroimaging and the law: trends and directions for future scholarship. Am J Bioethics 7:44-56
205. Tovino SA. (2007b). Functional neuroimaging information: a case for neuro exceptionalism?. Fla St Univ Law Rev 34:415-489
206. Trout JD. (2008). Seduction without cause: uncovering explanatory neurophilia. Trends Cogn Sci 12:281-282
207. U.S. v. Scheffer. (1998). 523 U.S. 303
208. United States v. Gigante. (1997). 982 F. Supp. 140
209. United States v. Kasim. (2008). 2008 WL 4822291 (N.D.Ind
210. United States v. Rodriguez-Berrios. (2009). 573 F.3d 55
211. United States v. Semrau. (2010). U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee, No. 07-10074
212. UttalWR. (2003). The new phrenology: the limits of localizing cognitive processes in the brain. The MIT Press, Cambridge
213. Uttal WR. (2008). Neuroscience in the courtroom: what every lawyer should know about the mind and the brain. Lawyers & Judges Publishing, Danvers
214. Van Middlesworth v. Century Bank & Trust Co. (2000). 2000 WL 33421451 (Mich.App
215. Viens AM. (2007). The use of functional neuroimaging technology in the assessment of loss and damages in tort law. The American Journal of Bioethics 7:63-65
216. Volkow ND, Li T. (2004). Drug addiction: the neurobiology of behavior gone awry. Nat Rev Neurosci 5:963-970
217. Vul E, Harris C, Winkielman P, Pashler H. (2009). Puzzlingly high correlations in fMRI studies of emotion, personality, and social cognition. Perspect Psychol Sci 4:274-290
218. Wagner AD. (2010). Can neuroscience identify lies?. In: Gazzaniga M (ed) A judge's guide to neuroscience, SAGE Center, University of California, Santa Barbara p. - 13-25
219. Ward J. (2009). The student's guide to cognitive neuroscience, 2nd edn. Psychology Press, Hove
220. Weber S, Habel U, Amunts K, Schneider F. (2008). Structural brain abnormalities in psychopaths: a review. Behav Sci Law 26:7-28
221. Weinstein J, Weinstein R. (2005). I know better than that: the role of emotions and the brain in family law disputes. J Law Fam Stud 7:351-403
222. Weisberg DS, Keil FC, Goodstein J, Rawson E, Gray JR. (2008). The seductive allure of neuroscience explanations. J Cogn Neurosci 20:470-477
223. Weiss Z. (1996). The legal admissibility of positron emission tomography scans in criminal cases: People v Spyder Cystkopf. Semin Clin Neuropsychiatry 1:202-210
224. Wilson v. Corestaff. (2010). Kings County, Supreme Court of the State of New York, Index No. 32996/07
225. Wixted JT. (2004). The psychology and neuroscience of forgetting. Annu Rev Psychol 2004:235-269
226. Wolf SM, Paradise J, Caga Anan C. (2008). The law of incidental findings in human subjects research: establishing researchers' duties. J Law Med Ethics 26:361-383
227. Wolpe PR, Foster KR, Langleben DD. (2005). Emerging neurotechnologies for lie-detection: promises and perils. Am J Bioeth 5:39-49
228. Young G, Kane AW, Nicholson K (eds). (2006). Causality: psychological knowledge in court: PTSD, pain, and TBI. Springer, New York
229. Young L, Bechara A, Tranel D, Damasio H, Hauser M, Damasio A. (2010). Damage to ventromedial prefrontal cortex impairs judgment of harmful intent. Neuron 65:845-851
230. Zeki S, Goodenough OR (eds). (2006). Law and the brain. Oxford University Press, Oxford