"These are two very specialized areas of evidence," said Imwinkelried. "They also happen to be the two areas that place a premium on creativity and imagination."

Imwinkelried wrote the book on scientific evidence, literally and figuratively. The Supreme Court itself cited the book in its landmark 1993 case, Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals on expert testimony. Now in a forthcoming fourth edition, Scientific Evidence treats such subjects as DNA typing, forensic psychiatry, and laser techniques for fingerprint detection.

The admission of evidence of uncharged crimes, the topic of another of his books, is the "single most litigated issue on the criminal side of the law," he said. Such evidence often looms large in cases of mass murderers. Before the O.J. Simpson trial, the Trial of the 20th Century was the prosecution of Wayne Williams for the Atlanta child killings. "Wayne Williams, for instance, was charged on two counts, but the hair and fiber evidence showed a pattern that pulled together 10 other killings," said Imwinkelried. "Once a jury is allowed to hear that, the whole atmosphere of the trial changes and the likelihood of a conviction increases dramatically.

• "This Is Like Déjà Vu All Over Again":  The Third, Constitutional Attack on the Admissibility of Police Laboratory Reports in Criminal Cases, Imwinkelried, 39 New Mexico Law Review 303 (2008)
• A Cautionary Note about Fingerprint Analysis and Reliance on Digital Technology, Cherry & Imwinkelried, 89 Judicature 334 (May-June 2006)
• Rethinking the Limits of the Interpretive Maxim of Constitutional Avoidance:  The Case Study of the Corroboration Requirement for Inculpatory Declarations Against Penal Interest (Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(3)), Imwinkelried, 44 Gonzaga Law Review 187 (2008/09)
• Redress for Loss of Private E-Data, Imwinkelried & Cherry, 45 Trial 48 (Feb. 2009)
• The Use of Forensic Entomology in Determining the Time of Death, Chan & Imwinkelried, 45 Criminal Law Bulletin 3 (2009).
• Winning Forensic Evidence Cases--Sometimes Without Even Using an Expert Witness, Imwinkelried & Cherry, 32 The Champion 24 (Nov./Dec. 2008)
• Chapter 26A: Trial Strategies and Techniques for Commercial     Lawsuits, in 3 Debtor-Creditor Law (LexisNexis Theodore Eisenberg, ed.     2008)
• Objections at Trial, M. Bright, R. Carlson & E. Imwinkelried, National Institute of      Trial Advocacy 5th ed. 2008
• California Trial Objections, E. Imwinkelried & T. Hallahan, Thomson-West 2008
• Evidentiary Foundations–Irish Edition, L. Heffernan, R. Ryan & E. Imwinkelried, Tottel Pub. 2008
• Evidentiary Foundations, 7th ed. 2008
• Criminal Evidentiary Foundations, E. Imwinkelried & D. Blinka, LEXIS 2d ed. 2007
• Military Evidentiary Foundations, D. Schlueter, S. Saltsburg, L. Schinasi & E. Imwinkelried, LEXIS 3d ed. 2007
• Scientific Evidence, P. Giannelli & E. Imwinkelried, LEXIS 4th ed. 2007, 2 vols
• United States v. Woods: A Story of the Triumph of Tradition, in  Evidence Stories 59 (R.Lempert, ed. 2006).
• McCormick, Evidence, (Thomson West 6th ed. 2006)(2 vols.).
• North Carolina Evidentiary Foundations, R. Mosteller, D. Beskind, C. Eagles, T. Ross & E. Imwinkelried, 2d ed. 2006
• Courtroom Criminal Evidence, E. Imwinkelried, P. Giannelli, F. Gilligan & F. Lederer, (4th ed. 2005)(2 vols.).
• Evidentiary Foundations, LEXIS Law Pub. 6th ed. 2005
• Texas Evidentiary Foundations, D. Schlueter, J. Onion, C. Barrow & E. Imwinkelried, (LEXIS Law Pub. 3d ed. 2004).
• Exculpatory Evidence: The Accused’s Constitutional Right to Introduce Favorable Evidence, E. Imwinkelried & N. Garland, LEXIS Law Pub. 3d ed. 2004
• The Relative Priority that Should Be Assigned to Trial Stage DNA Issues, in DNA and the Criminal Justice System (D. Lazer, ed. 2004)
• The Methods of Attacking Scientific Evidence, LEXIS Law Pub. 4th ed. 2004
• Pretrial Discovery: Strategy and Tactics, E. Imwinkelried & T. Blumoff, Thomson West rev.ed. 2004
• Viewpoint: Internet Theft Is Avoidable, Cherry & Imwinkelried, 92 Judicature 7 (July-Aug. 2008).
• Controlled Substance Analogue Enforcement Act Criminal Defense, Anacker & Imwinkelried, 37 Southwestern University Law Review 267 (2008).
• Law for the Expert Witness by Daniel A. Bronstein, 48 Jurimetrics 241 (Wint. 2008).
• The Case Against Abandoning the Search for Substantive Accuracy, 38 Seton Hall Law Review 1031 (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 Law Review 1295 (2007).
• Reshaping the ‘Grotesque’ Doctrine of Character Evidence: The Reform Implications of the Most Recent Psychological Research, 36 Southwestern University Law Review 741 (2008).
• Impoverishing the Trier of Fact: Excluding the Proponent’s Expert Testimony Due to the Opponent’s Inability to Afford Rebuttal Evidence, 40 Connecticut Law Review 317 (2007).
• Defeating Deference: A Practitioner’s Guide to Overcoming the Chevron Doctrine, 31 American Journal of Trial Advocacy 69 (2007).
• The Danger of Exposure to the Internet, Cherry & Imwinkelried, 91 Judicature     57 (Sep.-Oct. 2007).
• Draft Article V of the Federal Rules of Evidence on Privileges,     One of the Most Influential Pieces of Legislation Never Enacted: The Strength of the Ingroup Loyalty of the Federal Judiciary, 58 Alabama Law Review 41 (2006).
• How Can We Improve the Reliability of Fingerprint Identification, Cherry & Imwinkelried, 90 Judicature 55 (Sep.-Oct. 2006).
• The Organization of the Evidence Course: The ‘Preliminaries’ to Helping     Students Develop the Skill of Identifying Nonhearsay, 50 St. Louis University Law Journal 1047 (2006).
• The Alienability of Evidentiary Privileges: Of Property and Evidence, Burden and Benefit, Hearsay and Privilege, 80 St. John’s Law Review 497 (2006).
• Forensic Science: The Confusing World of Controlled Substance Analogue (CSA) Criminal Defense, Anacker & Imwinkelried, 42 Criminal Law Bulletin 744 (Nov.-Dec. 2006).
• An Evidentiary Paradox: Defending the Character Evidence Prohibition     by Upholding a Non-Character Theory of Logical Relevance, the Doctrine of Chances, 40 University of Richmond Law Review 419 (2006).
• The Accused’s Constitutional Right to Introduce Critical, Demonstrably Reliable Exculpatory Evidence, Heffernan & Imwinkelried, 40 Irish Jurist 111 (2005).
• Forensic Science: Palynology, the Use of Pollen and Spores as Associative Trace Evidence, Min & Imwinkelried, 41 Criminal Law Bulletin 655 (Nov.-Dec. 2005).
• Federal Civil Rights Laws to Right the Wrong of Evidence Spoliation in Civil Cases in State Court, Johns & Imwinkelried, 28 American Journal of Trial Advocacy 279 (2004).
• Can This Photo Be Trusted?, 41 Trial 48 (Oct. 2005).
• Daubert Attacks: The Three Fundamentally Different Arguments That the Opponent Can Make Under Federal Rule of Evidence 104(a), 41 Criminal Law Bulletin 423 (July-Aug. 2005).
• A More Modest Proposal Than A Common Law for the Age of      Statutes: Greater Reliance in Statutory Interpretation on the Concept of     Interpretative Intention, 68 Albany Law Review 949 (2005).
• Expert Testimony by Ethicists: What Should be the Norm?, 33 The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 198 (2005).
• Waiver Raised to the Second Power: Waivers of Evidentiary Privileges by Lawyers Representing Accused Being Tried in Absentia, Gilligan & Imwinkelried, 56 South Carolina Law Review 509 (2005).
• A Psychological Critique of the Assumptions Underlying the Law of Evidentiary Privileges: Insights from the Literature on Self-Disclosure, 38 Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 707 (2004).
• Forensic Science: Plant and Water Analysis, 41 Criminal Law  Bulletin 75 (Jan.-Feb. 2005).
• The Need to Integrate Legisprudence into the Evidence Course, in Teaching the Law School Curriculum 194 (Carolina Academic Press 2004).
• Junk Science’ in the Courtroom: Will the Changes in the American     Law of Expert Testimony Influence the Irish Courts?, 26 Dublin University Law Journal 83 (2004).
• The Admissibility and Legal Sufficiency of Testimony About Differential Diagnosis (Etiology): Of Under- and Over-Estimations, 56 Baylor Law Review 391 (2004).
• Forensic Science: Glass Evidence, 39 Criminal Law Bulletin 608 (Sep.-Oct. 2003).
• Comparative Bullet Lead Analysis (CBLA) Evidence: Valid Inference or Ipse Dixit?, Imwinkelried & Tobin, 28 Oklahoma City Law Review 43 (2003).
• Using the Evidence Course as a Vehicle for Teaching Legisprudential Skills, 21 Quinnipiac Law Review 907 (2003).
• The Relativity of Reliability, 34 Seton Hall Law Review 269 (2003).
• Privacy and Privilege in Civil Family Law Disputes, 18 Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers 75 (2002).
• Evidentiary Tactics: Selecting the ‘Best’ Evidence to Simplify the Case, Imwinkelried & Schlueter, 19 Criminal Justice 20 (Summer 2004).
• Questioning the Behavioral Assumption Underlying Wigmorean Absolutism in the Law of Evidentiary Privileges, 65 University of Pittsburgh Law Review 145 (2004).
• THE NEW WIGMORE:A TREATISE ON EVIDENCE: EVIDENTIARY PRIVILEGES, (Aspen Law & Business 2002) (2 vols).
• DYNAMICS OF TRIAL PRACTICE: PROBLEMS AND MATERIALS, (Thompson-West 3d ed. 2002) (with R. Carlson).
• EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS 5th ed. 2002).
• EVIDENCE:TEACHING MATERIALS FOR AN AGE OF SCIENCE AND STATUTES, (LEXIS 5th ed. 2002)(with Carlson, Kionka & Strachan).
• FLORIDA EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS 3d ed. 2001)(with Schinasi & Graham).
• OBJECTIONS AT TRIAL, (LEXIS 4th ed. 2001)(with Bright & Carlson).
• MODERN LITIGATION AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY HANDBOOK: THE LIMITS OF ZEALOUS ADVOCACY, (Aspen 2d ed. 2000)(with Fortune & Underwood).
• MISSOURI EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS 2d ed. 2000)(with O'Brien, Hamilton & Buckley).
• MILITARY EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS 2d ed. 2000)(with Schlueter, Saltzburg & Schinasi).
• CALIFORNIA EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS 3d ed. 2000)(with Wydick & Hogan).
• CALIFORNIA AND FEDERAL EVIDENCE TRIAL BOOK, (LEXIS 1999) (with S. Saltzburg).
• FORENSIC DNA TYPING: SELECTED LEGAL ISSUES, (Nat'l. Comm'n. On the Future of DNA Evidence 2000) (with D. H. Kaye).
• SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, (LEXIS 3d ed. 1999) (2 vols.) (with P. Giannelli).
• PRETRIAL DISCOVERY: STRATEGY AND TACTICS, (West rev. ed. 1999) (with T. Blumoff).
• EVIDENCE, (West 5th ed. 1999) (2 vols.) (with J. Strong, K. Broun, G. Dix, D. Kaye, R. Mosteller & R. Roberts, McCormick).
• COURTROOM CRIMINAL EVIDENCE, (LEXIS 3d ed. 1998)(2 vols.) (with P. Giannelli, F. Gilligan & F. Lederer).
• OBJECTIONS AT TRIAL, (LEXIS 3d. ed.1998) (with M. Bright, R. Carlson).
• UNCHARGED MISCONDUCT: EVIDENCE, (West rev. ed. 1998) (2 vol.).
• EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS 4th ed., 1998).
• CRIMINAL EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (LEXIS 1997) (with Blinka).
• THE METHODS OF ATTACKING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, (LEXIS 3d ed., 1997).
• FEDERAL EVIDENCE TACTICS, (Matthew Bender 1997) (with Schlueter).
• EVIDENCE: TEACHING MATERIALS FOR AN AGE OF SCIENCE AND STATUTES, (Michie 4th ed., 1997) (with Carlson, Kionka & Strachan).
• EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE: THE ACCUSED'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO INTRODUCE FAVORABLE EVIDENCE, (Michie 2d ed., 1996) (with N. Garland).
• MODERN LITIGATION AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY HANDBOOK, (Little, Brown & Co. 1996) (with W. Fortune & R. Underwood).
• DYNAMICS OF TRIAL PRACTICE, (West 2d ed., 1995) (with R. Carlson).
• EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (Michie 3d ed. 1995).
• CALIFORNIA EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (Michie 2d ed., 1994) (with R. Wydick & J. Hogan).
• MILITARY EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATIONS, (Michie 1994) (with D. Schlueter, S. Saltzburg, & L. Schinasi).
• COURTROOM CRIMINAL EVIDENCE, (Michie 2d ed., 1993) (with P. Giannelli, F. Gilligan & F. Lederer).
• PRETRIAL DISCOVERY: THE DEVELOPMENT OF PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT, (Michie 1993) (with T. Blumoff & M. Johns).
• EVIDENTIARY DISTINCTIONS: UNDERSTANDING THE FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE, (Michie 1993).
• EVIDENCE IN THE NINETIES, (Michie 3d ed., 1991) (with R. Carlson & E. Kionka).
• CONTRACT LAWSUITS: TRIAL STRATEGIES AND TECHNIQUES, (Michie 2d ed., 1989).
• The Meaning of ‘Appropriate Validation’ in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Interpreted in Light of the Broader Rationalist Tradition, Not the Narrow Scientific Tradition, 30 FL. ST. U. L. REV. 735 (2003)
• Expert Testimony by Ethicists: What Should Be the Norm?, 76 TEMP. L. REV. 91 (2003)
• THE NEW WIGMORE: An Essay on Rethinking the Foundation of Evidentiary Privileges, 83 B. U. L. REV. 315 (2003)
• Peer Dialogue: The How and What of ‘Appropriate Validation’ Under Daubert: Reconsidering the Treatment of Einstein and Freud, 68 MO. L. REV. 43 (2003)
• The Dubiety of Social Engineering Through Evidence: A Reply to Professor Sanchirico’s Recent Article on Character Evidence, 51 DRAKE L. REV. 283 (2003)
• A Minimalist Approach to the Presentation of Expert Testimony, 31 STETSON L. REV. 105 (2001)
• The Reach of Winship: Invalidating Evidentiary Admissibility Standards That Undermine the Prosecution’s Obligation to Prove the Defendant’s Guilt Beyond A Reasonable Doubt, 70 U.M.K.C.L. REV. 865 (2002)
• Can We Rely on the Alleged Constitutional Right to Informational Privacy to Secure Genetic Privacy in the Courtroom?, 31 SETON HALL L. REV. 926 (2001)
• Introduction to the Evidence Symposium: The New Generation of Realists in Evidence Law, 55 U. MIAMI L. REV. 527 (2001)
• DNA Typing: Emerging or Neglected Issues, 76 WASH. L. REV. 413 (2001) (with Kaye)
• Bringing the ‘Opening the Door’ Theory to a Close: The Tendency to Overlook the Specific Contradiction Doctrine in Evidence Law, 41 SANTA CLARA L. REV. 807 (2001) (with Gillian)
• Logerquist v. McVey: The Majority’s Flawed Procedural Assumptions, 33 ARIZ. ST. L. J. 121 (2001)
• 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)
• The Taxonomy of Testimony Post-Kumho: Refocusing on the Bottomlines of Reliability and Necessity, 30 CUMB. L. REV. 185 (2000)
• Prejudice to the Nth Degree: The Introduction of Uncharged Misconduct Admissible Only Against a Co-defendant at a Megatrial, 53 OKLA. L. REV. 35 (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 20 (2000)
• A Final Comment -- The Importance of the Procedural Framework, 50 CASE W. RES. L. REV. 669 (2000)
• 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)
• 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)
• The Escape Hatches from Frye and Daubert: Sometimes You Don't Need to Lay Either Foundation in Order to Introduce Expert Testimony, 23 AM. J. TRIAL ADVOC. 1 (1999)
• The Rivalry Between Truth and Privilege: The Weakness of the Supreme Court's Instrumental Reasoning in Jaffee v. Ramond, 518 U.S. 1 (1996)," 49 HASTINGS L. J. 969 (1998)
• The Silence Speaks Volumes: A Brief Reflection on the Question of Whether It Is Necessary or Even Desirable to Fill the Seeming Gaps in Article VI of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Governing the Admissibility of Evidence Logically Relevant to the Witness's Credibility, 1998 ILLINOIS L. REV. 1013 (1998)
• A Radical Approach to the Law of Impeachment: The Statutory Outer Limits, 22 AM. J. TRIAL ADVOC. 1 (1998)
• Article V: Privileges, EMERGING PROBLEMS UNDER THE FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (2d ed., 1998)
• The Supreme Court's Decision to Recognize a Psychotherapist Privilege in Jaffee v. Redmond, 116 S. CT. 1923 (1996): The Meaning of "Experience" and the “Role of Reason” Under Federal Rule of Evidence 501, 75 U. CIN. L. REV. 1019 (1997) (with Amann)
• Issues Once Moot: The Other Evidentiary Objections to the Admissibility of Exculpatory Polygraph Examinations, 32 WAKE FOREST L. REV. 1045 (1997) (with McCall)
• Judicial Remedies for the Exposure of the Jury to 'Irrelevant' Evidence, 34 HOUS. L. REV. 73 (1997)
• The Theory of "Unconscious Transference:" The Latest threat to the Shield Laws Protecting the Privacy of Victims of Sex Offenses, 38 B. C. L. REV. 107 (1996)
• Moving Beyond 'Top Down' Grand Theories of Statutory Construction: A 'Bottom Up' Interpretive Approach to the Federal Rules of Evidence, 75 OR. L. REV. 389 (1996)
• The Case Against Evidentiary Admissibility Standards That Attempt to ‘Freeze' the State of a Scientific Technique, 67 U. COLO. L. REV. 887 (1996)
• Declarations Against Social Interest: The (Still) Embarrassingly Neglected Hearsay Exception, 69 S. CAL. L. REV. 1427 (1996)
• Evidence Law Visits Jurassic Park: The Far-Reaching Implications of the Daubert Court's Recognition of the Uncertainty of Scientific Enterprise, 71 IOWA L. REV. 55 (1995)
• Using a Contextual Construction to Resolve the Dispute over the Meaning of the Term ‘Plan' in Federal Rule Evidence 404(b), 43 U. KAN. L. REV. 1005 (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 Chemical Pharmaceutical, Inc., 54 MD. L. REV. 352 (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)
• Some Comments About Mr. David Karp's Remarks on Propensity Evidence, 70 CHI.- KENT L. REV. 37 (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. 511 (1994)
• The Next Step After Daubert: Developing a Similarly Epistemological Approach to Ensuring the Reliability of Nonscientific Expert Testimony, 15 CARDOZO L. REV. 2271 (1994)
• A Small Contribution to the Debate Over the Proposed Legislation Abolishing the Character Evidence Prohibition in Sex Offense Prosecutions, 44 SYRACUSE L. REV. 1125 (1993)
• 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
• The Educational Significance of the Syllogistic Structure of Expert Testimony, 87 N.W. U. L. REV. 1148 (1993)
• The Evolution of the Use of the Doctrine of Chances as Theory of Admissibility for Similar Fact Evidence, 22 ANGLO-AM. L. REV. 73 (1993)
• The Worst Evidence Principle: The Best Hypothesis as to the Logical Structure of Evidence Law, 46 U. MIAMI L. REV. 1069 (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. 21 (1992)
• A Comparativist Critique of the Interface Between Hearsay and Expert Opinion in American Evidence Law, 33 B.C. L. REV. 1 (1991)
• Evidence Pedagogy in the Age of Statutes, 41 J. LEGAL EDUC. 227 (1991)
• The Recognition of an Accused's Constitutional Right to Introduce Expert Testimony Attacking the Weight of Prosecution Scientific Evidence: The Antidote for the Supreme Court's Mistaken Assumption in California v. Trombetta (with Scofield), 33 ARIZ. L. REV. 59 (1991)
• The Right to `Plead Out' Issues and Block the Admission of Prejudicial Evidence: The Differential Treatment of Civil Litigants and the Criminal Accused as a Denial of Equal Protection, 40 EMORY L.J. 341 (1991)
• On Achieving Synergy in the Law School Curriculum, 66 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 739 (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.Q. 19 (1991)
• The Use of an Accused's Uncharged Misconduct to Prove Mens Rea: The Doctrines Which Threaten to Engulf the Character Evidence Prohibition, 51 OHIO ST. L.J. 575 (1990)
• The Case for Recognizing a New Constitutional Entitlement: The Right to Present Favorable Evidence in Civil Cases, 1990 UTAH L. REV. 1
• The Applicability 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.Q. 19 (1990)
• The Evolution of the American Test for the Admissibility of Scientific Evidence, 30 MED., SCI., & L. 60 (1990)
• The Admissibility of Similar Facts Evidence in Civil Cases in the United Kingdom and the United States: The Need for Rethinking on Both Sides of the Atlantic, 9 LIVERPOOL L. REV. 137 (1989)
• The Education Philosophy of the Trial Practice Course: Reweaving the Seamless Web, 23 GA. L. REV. 663 (1989)
• 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)
• The 'Bases' of Expert Testimony: The Syllogistic Structure of Scientific Testimony, 67 N.C. L. REV. 1 (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)
• The Worst Surprise of All: No Right to Pretrial Discovery of the Prosecution's Uncharged Misconduct Evidence, 56 FORDHAM L. REV. 247 (1987)
• 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)
• Science Take the Stand, 26 THE SCIENCES 20 (1986)
• The Development of Professional Judgment in Law School Litigation Courses: The Concepts of Trial Theory and Theme, 39 VAND. L. REV. 59 (1986)
• Judge Versus Jury: Who Should Decide Questions of Preliminary Facts Conditioning the Admissibility of Scientific Evidence?, 25 WM. & MARY L. REV. 577 (1984)
• Forensic Hair Analysis: The Case Against the Underemployment of Scientific Evidence, 39 WASH. & LEE L. REV. 41 (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)
• The Constitutionality of Introducing Evaluative Laboratory Reports Against Criminal Defendants, 30 HASTINGS L.J. 621 (1979)
• The Legacy of Greer v. Spock: The Public Forum Doctrine and the Principle of the Military's Political Neutrality, 65 GEO. L.J. 773 (1977) (with Zillman)
• Constitutional Rights and Military Necessity: Some Reflections on the Society Apart, 51 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 296 (1976) (with Zillman)
• An Evolution in the First Amendment: Overbreadth Analysis and Free Speech within the Military Community, 54 TEX. L. REV. 42 (1975) (with Zillman)
• The Unconstitutional Burden of Article 15: A Rebuttal, 83 YALE L.J. 524 (1974) (with Gilligan)