Showing results 1-3 of 3.

Cases using phrasing similar to:
"To support its argument, the defendant refers to Rule 702's Advisory Committee note, which states that "the more subjective and controversial the expert's inquiry, the more likely the testimony should be excluded as unreliable.""

  US v. Frazier - 11th Circuit

Decided: 10/15/2004
District Court Decision: Excluded In Part, Admitted
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed

In Daubert, the Supreme Court suggested that a trial court assessing the reliability of proposed scientific testimony might consider, among others, the following factors: (1) whether the theory or technique underpinning the expert's opinion "can be (or has been) tested"; (2) whether the theory or technique "has been subjected to peer review and publication"; (3) whether, with respect to particular theory or technique, there is a high "known or potential rate of error," and whether there are "standards controlling the technique's operation"; and (4) whether the theory or technique enjoys "general acceptance" within the "relevant scientific community." ... In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993), the Supreme Court "assign[ed] to the trial judge the task of ensuring that an expert's testimony both rests on a reliable foundation and is relevant to the task at hand."

Cited 419 times
Heuristics Applied sciences Rape Retailing Secondary sexual characteristics 

  US v. Stagliano - Dist. of Columbia Circuit

Decided: 8/4/2010

Under Daubert, if a party proffers expert testimony that is scientific in nature, it is admissible only if the trial court concludes: (1) that the reasoning or methodology underlying the testimony is scientifically valid, and (2) that the reasoning or methodology will assist the trier of fact to understand or determine a fact in issue. ... On June 24, 2010, I held a Daubert hearing to elicit testimony from the prospective expert witnesses about their qualifications and about the general theories, 226*226 principles, or methodologies that will undergird their testimony at trial.[3]

Cited 2 times

  US v. Stagliano - Dist. of Columbia Circuit

Decided: 7/30/2010

Under Daubert, if a party proffers expert testimony that is scientific in nature, it is admissible only if the trial court concludes: (1) that the reasoning or methodology underlying the testimony is scientifically valid, and (2) that the reasoning or methodology will assist the trier of fact to understand or determine a fact in issue. ... On June 24, 2010, I held a Daubert hearing to elicit testimony from the prospective expert witnesses about their qualifications and about the general theories, principles, or methodologies that will undergird their testimony at trial.[3]

Cited 0 times