A TOTAL OF 68 UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT/SUBJECTS READ AN EDITED, 26-PAGE TRANSCRIPT OF AN ACTUAL CRIMINAL CASE IN WHICH THE CRUCIAL TESTIMONY CONCERNED THE INTOXICATION OF THE VICTIM. A MALE EYEWITNESS (PHYSICIAN, POLICE OFFICER, OR LAYPERSON) DELIVERED THE CRUCIAL TESTIMONY AGAINST THE DEFENDANT IN EITHER AN OPINIONATED OR NONOPINIONATED MANNER. DEPENDENT VARIABLES WERE SUBJECTS' VERDICTS AND RECOMMENDED SENTENCES. RESULTS INDICATED THAT VERDICTS AND SENTENCES WERE MOST SEVERE FOLLOWING TESTIMONY AGAINST THE DEFENDANT BY A PHYSICIAN AND LEAST SEVERE FOLLOWING TESTIMONY AGAINST THE DEFENDANT BY A POLICE OFFICER. AN INTERACTION BETWEEN THE CRIMINAL CHARGE AND THE MANNER OF DELIVERY OF TESTIMONY SHOWED THAT OPINIONATED DELIVERY WAS FOLLOWED BY MORE SEVERE JUDGMENTS OF GUILT ON THE CHARGES OF FIRST AND SECOND DEGREE MURDER, WHEREAS NONOPINIONATED DELIVERY WAS FOLLOWED BY MORE SEVERE JUDGMENTS OF GUILT ON THE CHARGE OF MANSLAUGHTER. THE TYPE OF EXPERT WITNESS AND THE MANNER OF TESTIMONY PRESENTATION AFFECTED SUBSEQUENT VERDICTS AND SENTENCES, ALTHOUGH IT IS NOT CLEAR THAT DIFFERENTIAL 'EXPERTNESS' WAS OF SIGNIFICANCE. SUCH FACTORS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN FUTURE RESEARCH STUDIES. TABULAR STATISTICAL ANALYSES AND REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED--LWM).