Single-color two-photon spectroscopy of Rydberg states in electric fields

Rydberg states of atomic helium with principal quantum numbers ranging from n=20 to n=100 have been prepared by non-resonance-enhanced single-color two-photon excitation from the metastable 2 {^3}S{_1} state. Photoexcitation was carried out using linearly and circularly polarized pulsed laser radiation. In the case of excitation with circularly polarized radiation, Rydberg states with azimuthal quantum number |m_{\ell}|=2 were prepared in zero electric field, and in homogeneous electric fields oriented parallel to the propagation axis of the laser radiation. In sufficiently strong electric fields, individual Rydberg-Stark states were resolved spectroscopically, highlighting the suitability of non-resonance-enhanced multiphoton excitation schemes for the preparation of long-lived high-|m_{\ell}| hydrogenic Rydberg states for deceleration and trapping experiments. Applications of similar schemes for Doppler-free excitation of positronium atoms to Rydberg states are also discussed

Defendant\u27s Brief in Opposition to Plaintiff\u27s Motion to Exclude Testimony of David Doughton

The State of Ohio responds to the Estate of Sam Sheppard’s motion to exclude the testimony of David Doughton, who was Richard Eberling’s defense attorney. The grounds for this motion are that Richard Eberling expressly waived attorney-client privilege. (David Doughton did not testify at trial

State\u27s Memorandum in Support of Limiting Testimony of Dr. Michael Sobel

This memorandum was submitted in support of the State’s motion to limit the testimony of Michael N. Sobel. The State expected Dr. Sobel to testify about the scar on Richard Eberling’s wrist. The State argued that Dr. Sobel, a forensic odontology expert, was not qualified to make conclusions about weapon/wounds after “exclud[ing] the existence of a bite mark” under Rule 702 of the Ohio Rules of Evidence. According to the State, an expert cannot be permitted to testify as an expert beyond his scope of expertise pursuant to Rule 104 of the Ohio Rules of Evidence. In his deposition, Dr. Sobel testified that a mark on Richard Eberling’s forearm was caused by Marilyn Sheppard’s fingernail. The State argued that this testimony is beyond the scope of his expertise because Dr. Sobel attended dental school, and is not qualified to give opinion testimony of skin marks and wounds

Defendant\u27s Witness List

A list of witnesses and exhibits the State of Ohio intends to use to prove that Sam Sheppard was not a wrongfully imprisoned individual

State\u27s Motion to Exclude by Counsel, to Testimony Including Plaintiff\u27s Exhibits 212-221 Relating to Prior Acquittal or Conviction of Samuel H. Sheppard in Criminal Proceedings, and Proceedings and Ruling in Habeas Corpus

This is the State of Ohio’s request that the court exclude exhibits and testimony that relates to the prior acquittal or conviction of Sam Sheppard. The state theorizes that references to this testimony denigrate the nature of the trial because the jury should give the evidence a fresh look and make its own independent examination. See order ruling on this motion

State\u27s Motion to Exclude by Counsel, to Testimony Including Plaintiff\u27s Exhibits 212-221 Relating to Prior Acquittal or Conviction of Samuel H. Sheppard in Criminal Proceedings, and Proceedings and Ruling in Habeas Corpus

This is the State of Ohio’s request that the court exclude exhibits and testimony that relates to the prior acquittal or conviction of Sam Sheppard. The state theorizes that references to this testimony denigrate the nature of the trial because the jury should give the evidence a fresh look and make its own independent examination. See order ruling on this motion

Defendant\u27s Motion to Compel Discovery

The defendant\u27s motion asks the court to compel the plaintiff to produce documents pertaining to expert witnesses Dr. Mohammad Tahir and Bart Epstein. The court overruled this motion on 9/7/1999; see docke