1 / 16

Daubert, Kumho, and Joiner: A Quick Overview

Daubert, Kumho, and Joiner: A Quick Overview. Glenn Langenburg Latent Print Examiner Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. Toronto Police Service 17 th Annual Identification Conference February 24, 2003 Toronto, ON. Frye v. United States (54 App. D.C. 46, 293 F.1013).

gayle
Télécharger la présentation

Daubert, Kumho, and Joiner: A Quick Overview

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Daubert, Kumho, and Joiner:A Quick Overview Glenn Langenburg Latent Print Examiner Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Toronto Police Service 17th Annual Identification Conference February 24, 2003 Toronto, ON

  2. Frye v. United States (54 App. D.C. 46, 293 F.1013) • Seminal evidentiary decision (1923) • Murder case before appellate court • “Systolic blood pressure deception test” • Experimental vs. demonstrable • Is it a well-recognized scientific principle or discovery?

  3. Frye v. United States (54 App. D.C. 46, 293 F.1013) • Novel techniques “…the thing from from which the deduction is made must be sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.”

  4. Federal Rules of Evidence (1975) • Codification of rules • 700 Rules—witness testimony • …IF Reliable and Relevant: • Sufficient facts or data • Reliable principles and methods • Principles and methods applied correctly “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…” -FRE, Rule 702

  5. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (509 U.S. 579, 1993) • Jason Daubert, Eric Schuller, parents, et. al. • Did Bendectin cause birth defects?

  6. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (509 U.S. 579, 1993) • Over 30 published studies • No teratogenic effects • Jason Daubert, Eric Schuller, parents, et. al. • Did Bendectin cause birth defects? • “Reworked” data by plaintiff said otherwise

  7. Daubert Opinion • Admissibility of scientific evidence • Federal Rules of Evidence (702) • Superceded Frye • Define “reliable” • Principles and methodology at issue …not conclusions

  8. Daubert Opinion • Majority opinion 7-2 • Majority delivered by Justice Blackmun • Gatekeeping role of trial judges

  9. Daubert Factors • “General acceptance” • Testing and validation • Known standards • Peer review • Rate of error

  10. Daubert Replaces Frye? • Frye • Frye Prongs (Kelly, Mack, Davis, etc.) • Modified Frye = Frye-bert • Federal Rules of Evidence • Daubert • States Rules of Evidence

  11. General Electric v. Joiner (522 U.S. 136, 1997) • Chronic exposure to PCB’s caused lung cancer • Joiner long-time smoker, family history • Experts for plaintiff had animal studies, etc. • Trial ruling: Daubert applied, facts did not “fit” this case • “Abuse of discretion” • Trial judge is the gatekeeper

  12. Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael (526 U.S. 137, 1999) • Kumho Tire Co. nee Samyang Tires, Inc. • Tire failure was cause of crash and deaths • Daubert factors apply to engineers, techs, etc. • Expert “knowledge” is the key • Two types of witnesses: • Lay • Expert

  13. Amended F.R.E.’s • Daubert: factors • Kumho: include technical, specialized • Joiner: gatekeeper trial judge • 1995: FDE challenge (US v. Starzecpyzel) • 1999: LPE challenge (US v. Mitchell)

  14. U.S. v. Starzecpyzel (No. 93 Cr. 553 (LLM), 1995) • Eileen Starzec and Roberta Pyzel • Defrauded artworks and valuables from wealthy widow (Ethel Brownstone) • Roberta, conservator of estate • Signatures on 2 key documents at question • Ruling: • FDE’s testimony admissible as non-scientific or “skilled” testimony • Equated FDE skill to that of harbor pilot • Saks testified for defense as expert witness

  15. U.S. v. Byron Mitchell (Cr. No. 96-00407, 1999) • Prints found on shift/handle of get-away car • Identified to Byron Mitchell • Filed motions to exclude evidence

More Related