James E. Rogers College of Law,
University of Arizona
Barbara E. Bergman is currently the Director of Advocacy at the James E. Rogers College of Law of the University of Arizona in Tucson. She also holds the honorable title of Emeritus Professor of Law at the University of New Mexico School of Law where she was an Interim Dean from 2012 – 2013 and Associate Dean from 2008 – 2012. From 1993 – 2015, as a Professor of Law, Bergman taught evidence/trial practice, advocacy and criminal procedure.
After graduating from Stanford Law School, she clerked for Judge Ben C. Duniway on the 9th Circuit. She also practiced at the Washington, D.C., firm of Wilmer, Cutler and Pickering and served for a year as associate counsel to President Jimmy Carter. Prior to joining the UNM faculty, she was a staff attorney at the Public Defender Service in the District of Columbia and practiced labor law at Bredhoff & Kaiser.
Barbara worked on the defense team in the State of Oklahoma v. Terry Nichols, the state death penalty case that prosecuted Nichols for conspiracy and murder in connection with the Oklahoma City bombing.
Professor Bergman is a past recipient of the Richard S. Jacobson Award for excellence in the teaching of trial advocacy from the Roscoe Pound Foundation. In addition to her work for The Professional Education Group, Professor Bergman teaches at various National Institute for Trial Advocacy (NITA) programs, including service as a team leader at the NITA National Program in Boulder, Colorado. She has also taught at the National Criminal Defense College and The Institute for Criminal Defense Advocacy.
Critically Acclaimed Author
Bergman is the co-author of the critically acclaimed Everytrial Criminal Defense Resource Book (Thomson West). She is also the editor of the D.C. Criminal Jury Instructions (4th Ed. Rev.). Professor Bergman and Nancy Hollander are the co-authors of the eight-volume 15th edition of Wharton’s Criminal Evidence (Thomson West). She is also co-author of the 14th edition of Wharton’s Criminal Procedure.
Evidentiary Crisis: Using
the Rules to Win at Trail