Showing results 1-2 of 2.

Cases using phrasing similar to:
"Four factors must appear in the record to uphold the admission of expert testimony: "1. qualified expert;"

  United States v. Distler - 6th Circuit

Decided: 2/12/1981

Reasoning from Brown, appellant contends that although the oil matching techniques testified about at trial are not new, the use of these techniques to analyze sewer samples has not reached the level of general acceptance that establishes an acceptable basis for the introduction of expert testimony in a criminal trial. ... With regard to the first inquiry mentioned above, the court concludes from the record that the methods employed by the experts who testified in the instant case, namely gas chromatograph analysis performed in conjunction with the various detectors, is a generally accepted method of matching oil samples.

Cited 9 times

  State v. Schimpf - TN

Decided: 1/2/1990

They thus stand in contrast to nonspecific "symptoms" of child abuse relied upon by experts in other cases, such as nightmares, crying spells, bedwetting, difficulty in school, weight loss, unstable family relationships, general anxiety, and the like, which obviously could be the result of emotional trauma caused by problems other than child sex abuse. ... Although analysis of the problem escalates rapidly into a state of juridicial complexity, it begins on rather mundane territory with two well-established principles: first, that a trial court has broad discretion to admit or exclude expert testimony and, second, that the decision to allow such evidence 197*197 cannot be disturbed on appeal unless there is a clear showing that the trial court has abused its discretion.

Cited 5 times