Helpful Hints
  • (1) You can search the entire content of Dean’s by phrase or by individual words. Just type your keywords into the search box and then pull down the search icon on the right and choose the option you need: search by word or by phrase or reset the content.
  • (2) Double click on a word in the content of a definition, and if the word is listed as a keyword in Dean’s, it will look that word up.
  • (3) You can use the search function to help jump the scrolling function. Simply type the first 2-3 letters into the search box then hit enter on your keyboard and the scroll will go to those Keywords that begin with those letters and allow you to scroll from there.

Computer generated animation (CGA) evidence has been admitted in most states that have considered the matter, including in the criminal context. See Pierce v. State, 718 So. 2d 806 (Fla. App. 1997)(holding that a CGA of an automobile accident was admissible when the testimony of three accident reconstruction experts established that the: (1) computer program used was accepted in engineering field as one of the leading computer aided design programs in the world; (2) CGA fairly and accurately reflected expert opinion of how accident occurred; (3) CGA was fair and accurate representation of what it purported to depict; and (4) data, information, and evidence utilized was of type reasonably relied upon by experts in field of forensic animation); See also State v. Clark, 101 Ohio App. 3d 389, 655 N.E.2d 795 (Ohio App. 8 Dist. 1995), Statev. Swinton, 268 Conn. 781, 847 A.2d 921, 945 n. 30 (Conn. 2004)(citing, among others, Cleveland v. Bryant, 236 Ga. App. 459, 512 S.E.2d 360 (Ga. App. 1999) (allowing a CGA as illustrative evidence); Harris v. State, 2000 OK CR 20, 13 P.3d 489, 495 (Okla. Crim. App.2000) (same), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1025, 121 S. Ct. 1971, 149 L. ...

Register or login to access full content