THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND

Similar documents
Keith Berkshire Berkshire Law Office, PLLC

THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND

Evidentiary Standards in the State of Illinois: The Interpretation and Implementation of Supreme Court Opinions

Qualifying a Witness as an Expert Using the Daubert Standard

Domestic Violence Advocates as Expert Witnesses

Daubert and Rule 702: Effectively Presenting and Challenging Experts in Federal Court

How to Testify. Qualifications for Testimony. Hugo A. Holland, Jr., J.D., CFE Prosecutor, State of Louisiana

EXPERT WITNESS: A COMPUTER SCIENCE EMPHASIS

Neil Feldscher, CIH, CSP, Esq. and Chip Darius, MA, OHST

COMMON OBJECTIONS CHART (excluding Hearsay, covered in next section)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LAKE CHARLES DIVISION * * * * * * * * *

Case4:07-cv PJH Document833-1 Filed09/09/10 Page1 of 5

Before HATCHETT, Chief Judge, HULL, Circuit Judge, and MOORE *, District Judge.

Daubert Issues For Footwear Examiners

Qualifications, Presentation and Challenges to Expert Testimony - Daubert (i.e. is a DFPS caseworker an expert)

Case 2:11-cv RBS -DEM Document 94 Filed 10/31/12 Page 1 of 6 PageID# 2118

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION ORDER

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS UNITED STATES. Senior Airman ROBERT P. WALLS United States Air Force ACM

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Preparing for Daubert Through the Life of a Case

United States District Court EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

COMMON OBJECTIONS CHART (excluding Hearsay, covered in next section)

Changes to Rule 702(a): Has North Carolina Codified Daubert and Does It Matter? During the past legislative session, the General Assembly changed Rule

Opinion Evidence. Penny J. White May 2015

Expert Witnesses in Capital Cases. by W. Erwin Spainhour Senior Resident Superior Court Judge Judicial District 19-A May 10, 2012

J. Max Wawrik Nancy Rosado Colon Law 16 Spring 2017

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA * * * ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case4:09-cv CW Document75 Filed06/11/09 Page1 of 6

2:12-cr SFC-MKM Doc # 227 Filed 12/06/13 Pg 1 of 12 Pg ID 1213 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

The Royalty Owners file this Response to Gertrude Petroleum Corporation s ( GPC )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION. Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO.

BATTLE OF THE EXPERTS: HOW TO EFFECTIVELY MANAGE AND LEVERAGE EXPERTS FOR OPTIMAL RESULTS

FlLED SUPERIQR CGURT CF GUAM

EFiled: Nov :25PM EST Transaction ID Case No. K14C WLW IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

Reporting Animal Cruelty for Veterinarians

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Raymond P. Moore

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

SIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE

BEGELMAN & ORLOW, P.C. Attorneys at Law

COUNTY. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ) ) MOTION TO EXCLUDE vs. ) TESTIMONY REGARDING ) FIELD SOBRIETY TESTS, ) Defendant. ) I.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CRIMINAL NO

Case 1:06-cv Document 695 Filed 02/23/10 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY. STATE OF DELAWARE ) ) v. ) ID No: ) BRADFORD JONES )

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Rumberger KIRK & CALDWELL

Being an Expert Witness

scc Doc 860 Filed 03/06/12 Entered 03/06/12 16:37:03 Main Document Pg 1 of 14

FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version)

FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version) (updated 10/07)

28a USC 702. NB: This unofficial compilation of the U.S. Code is current as of Jan. 5, 2009 (see

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. v. Carmichael. Case Background

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA VERSUS NO ORDER AND REASONS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

Case 1:14-cv TSC Document 108 Filed 03/21/16 Page 1 of 116

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

Case 1:15-cv JCH-LF Document 60 Filed 11/04/16 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

No. 09SC708, People v. Rector, Criminal Law -- admission of expert testimony. The supreme court reverses the court of appeals judgment

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF WOOD COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA. // Case No. 02-F-131 (Thomas C Evans, III, Judge)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Robert E. Blackburn

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR LAKE COUNTY. CASE No CR

CHRISTIAN V. GRAY: THE OKLAHOMA SUPREME COURT ACCEPTS THE DAUBERT STANDARD

RULES OF EVIDENCE LEGAL STANDARDS

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Supreme Court significantly revised the framework for determining the. 221, 590 P2d 1198 (1979), in light of current scientific research and adopt[ed]

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE Delaware Avenue P.O. Box 876 P.O. Box 2165 Georgetown, DE Wilmington, DE 19899

Written materials by Jonathan D. Sasser

CASE NO. 1D Bill McCabe, Longwood, and Tonya A. Oliver, Trinity, for Appellant.

Case 1:17-cr KBF Document 819 Filed 06/11/18 Page ORDERED. 1 of 8 GUIDELINES REGARDING APPROPRIATE USE OF 302 FORMS IN CRIMINAL TRIALS

Case 1:11-cv WJM-CBS Document 127 Filed 12/16/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA ORDER. Presently before the court is the Noorda defendants 1 motion in limine no. 1 to exclude Aaron

O'Hara: Tasks of an Expert Witness Page 1 of 9

I. Facts and Proceedings Below

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

United States District Court EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

Case 1:15-cv WJM-KLM Document 136 Filed 05/12/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Will Your Expert Evidence be Admitted? I Don t Know Ask Your Judge. presented by Suzanne M. Driscoll, Esq. Shutts & Bowen LLP Fort Lauderdale, FL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION. v. Case No: 2:17-cv-656-FtM-29UAM OPINION AND ORDER

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION CASE NO CR-FERGUSON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

James McNamara v. Kmart Corp

Unit 2 Overview of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The law of evidence is a set of rules and principles that govern the admissibility of

A New Era for Science and the Law: The Face of Scientific Evidence in the Federal Courts after Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Misinterpretation and Misapplication of Kumho Tire to Business Valuation

Post-Daubert Confusion With Expert Testimony

Case 3:07-cr EDL Document 49 Filed 03/25/2008 Page 1 of 8

MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNRELIABLE EVIDENCE (Plant or root growth evidence) Defendant,, by and through her undersigned attorney, moves this Honorable

Oklahoma High School Mock Trial Program RULES OF EVIDENCE ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS. Rule 101. Scope

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

2011 RULES OF EVIDENCE

Minnesota Rules of Evidence [Relevant Extracts Full Rules here] ARTICLE 7. OPINIONS AND EXPERT TESTIMONY. Rule 701. Opinion Testimony by Lay Witness

Presenters 10/13/2015. Effective Use of Evidence and Expert Witnesses in Immigration Court

Defending Toxic Tort Claims

EMPIRION EVIDENCE ORDINANCE

New Expert Rules under HB 153 and other Expert tips

2016 FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version)

California Bar Examination

Transcription:

THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND THE RULE OF LAW AND THE NATIONAL JUDICIAL COLLEGE EXPERT WITNESSES DIVIDER 6 Professor Michael Johnson OBJECTIVES: After this session, you will be able to: 1. Distinguish between expert and lay opinion; 2. Define the issues in determining whether to admit expert testimony; and 3. Describe whether otherwise reliable expert testimony fits the case. REQUIRED READING: PAGE Michael Johnson, Expert Witnesses (Aug. 2011) [NCJRL PowerPoint]...1 SI: TECHNOLOGY ASSISTED CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN: EVIDENTIARY & PROCEDURAL MATTERS AT TRIAL AUGUST 1-2, 2011 RENO, NV WB/KZ

Michael Johnson Counsel for National Programs NCJRL Copyright 2011 NCJRL All Rights Reserved Distinguish between expert and lay opinion. Define the issues in determining whether to admit expert testimony. Describe whether otherwise reliable expert testimony fits the case. Federal Rule of Evidence 702 If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case. 1

RULE 703. BASES OF OPINION TESTIMONY BY EXPERTS The facts or data in the particular case upon which an expert bases an opinion or inference may be those perceived by or made known to the expert at or before the hearing. If of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the particular field in forming opinions or inferences upon the subject, the facts or data need not be admissible in evidence in order for the opinion or inference to be admitted. Facts or data that are otherwise inadmissible shall not be disclosed to the jury by the proponent of the opinion or inference unless the court determines that their probative value substantially outweighs their prejudicial effect. RULE 705. DISCLOSURE OF FACTS OR DATA UNDERLYING EXPERT OPINION The expert may testify in terms of opinion or inference and give reasons therefor without first testifying to the underlying facts or data, unless the court requires otherwise. The expert may in any event be required to disclose the underlying facts or data on cross- examination. RULE 704. OPINION ON ULTIMATE ISSUE (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), testimony in the form of an opinion or inference otherwise admissible is not objectionable because it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact. (b) No expert witness testifying with respect to the mental state or condition of a defendant in a criminal case may state an opinion or inference as to whether the defendant did or did not have the mental state or condition constituting an element of the crime charged or of a defense thereto. Such ultimate issues are matters for the trier of fact alone. 2

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) Frye v. United States,, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923) Fifteen States and the District of Columbia Whether the theory or technique has achieved general acceptance in the scientific or technical community. Scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge Judge as Gatekeeper Reliable principles and methods Technique reliably applied Does evidence fit the facts? Unfair prejudice, confusion, or potential to mislead jury does not substantially outweigh probative value 3

Whether the theory or technique can be or has been tested. Whether the theory or technique has been subject to peer review and publication. Whether a high known or potential rate of error exists. Whether the theory or technique enjoys general acceptance within the relevant scientific or technical community. Factors listed are illustrative, not exclusive Essential test is whether the principles and methods are sufficiently reliable to allow the jury to consider the evidence Methods and principles are reliable Methods and principles have been reliably applied to the facts of the case at hand 4

More restrictive than relevance Purpose of testimony is to assist the trier of facts Fit depends on applicable legal principles of the case Part of gate keeping function With lay opinion, the jury decides if the evidence fits by determining whether it helps with the verdict Does unfair prejudice, confusion, or misleading the jury substantially outweigh the probative value? Judges exercise more control over expert testimony than lay testimony because of the tendency for the jury to overvalue the evidence of an expert. Kumho Tire Company v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999) Strict application of Daubert s listed criteria is incorrect Dauber test is intended to be flexible guideline Particularly true when assessing technical field, or other specialized knowledge 5

Personal knowledge Evidence presented at trial Evidence that has not been admitted at trial, but which is the type that experts in that field generally consider and rely upon Rule 703 allows admission of the basis for an expert s opinion, if the evidence is not otherwise admissible, only upon a reverse FRE 403 showing, that is, that the probative value substantially outweighs the prejudicial effect. The basis can be brought out on cross examination without satisfying the requirement. RULE 701. OPINION TESTIMONY BY LAY WITNESSES If the witness is not testifying as an expert, the witness testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences which are (a) rationally based on the perception of the witness, (b) helpful to a clear understanding of the witness testimony or the determination of a fact in issue, and (c) not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of Rule 702. 6

The opinion must be based on personal knowledge The opinion must be helpful to the jury The opinion may not rest on scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge, although it may rest on distinctive experiences in the witness s life 7