Bonnie Baker Publishes Article on Implications of Supreme Court's Expert Intent Ruling for Criminal Cases

The New York Law Journal recently published an article written by Friedman Kaplan counsel Bonnie M. Baker on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Diaz v. United States, which held that expert testimony concluding that “most people” similar to a criminal defendant have a particular mental state does not violate Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b), which prohibits expert opinion evidence on whether a criminal defendant had or lacked the mental state required for conviction. In her article, Bonnie outlines the implications of the ruling for white-collar practitioners and discusses how defense counsel can navigate the post-Diaz landscape.

The full text of the article can be found below.

View Document(s):

• New York Law Journal - Implications of SCOTUS Expert Intent Ruling for the White-Collar Bar