Once a prosecutor determines to employ an expert, a number of distinct decisions must be confronted-from choosing the expert, to complying with discovery obligations, to presenting the testimony at trial. Part I of this essay considers the selection of experts. Although improper selection of experts can be viewed as merely another aspect of presenting misleading testimony, we treat it separately in this essay because the literature typically ignores it. Part 1I examines the pretrial disclosure of scientific evidence. The issues that have arisen in this context include late disclosure, omitting information from laboratory reports, declining to have a report prepared, and failing to disclose exculpatory evidence. Part III explores a number of ways in which prosecutors have presented expert testimony in a misleading manner. What practices should be considered "misleading" is far from obvious. In Part IV, we take a broader view and consider reforms that have relevance across a range of issues



Publication Date


Document Type


Place of Original Publication

Fordham Law Review

Publication Information

68 Fordham Law Review 1453 (2000)


COinS Kevin C. McMunigal Faculty Bio