Note:
Thomas Meyer Selman, Awakening from the Exclusionary Trance: A Balancing Approach to the Admissibility of Hypnotically Refreshed Testimony, 61 TEXAS L. REV. 719 (1982).
 

Abstract:
The admission into evidence of hypnotically refreshed testimony is a hotly debated topic. Proponents of allowing hypnotically refreshed testimony into evidence argue that it may advance the proceeding towards a just resolution, because hypnosis may allow a witness to remember things he otherwise would not be able to recall. Opponents of hypnotically refreshed testimony argue that its admission could lead to an incorrect verdict. Hypnotically refreshed testimony may be unreliable, as the subject may confabulate or fabricate details of his recollection. Also, a hypnotically refreshed witness may be impervious to cross-examination, due to his newfound certainty that his distorted recollections are accurate. Such a witness may not fear perjury, because he is certain that he is telling the truth. The author argues that, in civil cases, the question of admissibility should be resolved according to accepted evidentiary procedure. In criminal cases, the issue becomes more complex, because of the Constitutional implications that a hypnotized witness might present for a defendant. Statutory notice provisions could be enacted to minimize the possibility that a criminal defendant might be deprived of his Constitutional rights.