Charles Flores argued that his conviction was improperly based on testimony from a witness who changed her recollection after hypnosis by an investigator.—
Charles Flores argued that his conviction was improperly based on testimony from a witness who changed her recollection after hypnosis by an investigator.
Charles Flores argued that his conviction was improperly based on testimony from a witness who changed her recollection after hypnosis by an investigator.



