Rock v. State
SimpleOriginal

Summary

The AK Supreme Court held hypnotically refreshed testimony inadmissible because hypnosis may distort memory, create false recollections, increase confidence in inaccurate memories, and undermine effective cross-examination.

1986 | State Juristiction

Rock v. State

Keywords Hypnotically refreshed testimony; inadmissible; hypnosis; distort memory; false recollections; inaccurate memories; cross-examination; memory distortion
Open Case as PDF

Summary

The Alaska Supreme Court found that testimony improved by hypnosis could not be used in court. This decision was made because hypnosis has the potential to alter memories, create false ones, make people more certain about incorrect memories, and hinder effective questioning by lawyers.

Open Case as PDF

Summary

The Alaska Supreme Court determined that testimony refreshed through hypnosis cannot be used in court. This decision was based on concerns that hypnosis might alter memories, create untrue recollections, make a person more certain about inaccurate memories, and make it difficult to question the testimony effectively during cross-examination.

Open Case as PDF

Summary

The Alaska Supreme Court ruled that testimony enhanced by hypnosis cannot be used in court. This decision was made because hypnosis can change memories, create new and incorrect memories, make people more certain about things they remember incorrectly, and make it harder to question those memories effectively.

Open Case as PDF

Summary

The top court in Alaska decided that testimony from someone who was hypnotized cannot be used in court. This is because hypnosis can change what a person remembers. It can also make people think they remember things that did not happen. Hypnosis might also make people too sure about memories that are wrong. This makes it hard for lawyers to question these memories in court.

Open Case as PDF

Footnotes and Citation

Cite

Rock v. State, 708 S.W.2d 78 (Ark. 1986)

Highlights