Admissibility Of Expert Testimony Research Articles

The effects of Daubert on the admissibility of expert testimony in state and federal criminal cases.

Appellate opinions were evaluated on variables related to expert admissibility to assess the effects of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in criminal cases. Analysis reveals changes in appellate courts’ consideration of Frye v. United States, the 4 Daubert criteria, and several Federal Rules of Evidence. The importance of Frye and the general acceptance criterion decreased over time, and the importance of the Daubert criteria increased over time. However, these changes were not consistent for all types of testimony. Overall, there is greater reliance on Daubert when determining the admissibility of a scientific expert. However, only criteria related to the Federal Rules of Evidence are reliably related to admissibility decisions. Details of appellate court application of the 4 Daubert criteria, the Federal Rules of Evidence, and other related factors are discussed.

The Importance of Reliable Measurement: The Whole-time Concept and Admissibility of Testimony under Daubert Standards

Abstract No abstract available.

The ‘Ordinary Person’ In Provocation Law: Is The ‘Objective’ Standard Objective?

In this paper, an assessment is made of the concept of the ‘ordinary person’ in provocation through the use of a literature review and an empirical study. The construction of this legal benchmark appears to be affected by both the dominant social attitudes and personal experiences, although expert evidence is invaluable in providing an interpretative social schema by which to view a defendant’s actions. Though calls have been made to abolish provocation as a defence to a criminal charge, a new test is proposed that asks whether the reasonable person, possessing all the defendant’s characteristics and having had all the defendant’s experiences, could have done the criminal act the defendant did in the circumstances. This reformulated model of the ‘reasonable defendant’ should cause less confusion amongst either the jury or judiciary in its application, be more conducive to the admission of expert testimony, and its flexibility will contribute to the attainment of substantive equality before the law in a modern heterogeneous society.

The Implications of <em>G.E. v. Joiner</em> for Admissibility of Expert Testimony

The Implications of <em>G.E. v. Joiner</em> for Admissibility of Expert Testimony

Defending the Rorschach in Court: An Analysis of Admissibility Using Legal and Professional Standards

There are a number of legal and professional standards that guide admissibility of expert testimony and psychometric evidence. The most important legal tests for admissibility include the Federal Rules of Evidence (1992), the Frye test (United States v. Frye, 1923), and the Daubert standard (Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 1993). Within the profession, Heilbrun (1992) and Marlowe (1995) have outlined criteria for the selection of psychological tests in forensic settings. Using these legal and professional standards, the Rorschach is analyzed according to individual criteria Although several issues require additional research, it is concluded that the status of the Rorschach Inkblot Method is such that it satisfies legal tests of admissibility and professional criteria that have been suggested. In those cases where the Rorschach is apt to be deemed inadmissible, it is likely due to how data from the instrument are utilized, rather than characteristics of the instrument itself.

The admissibility of expert testimony based upon clinical judgment and scientific research.

The admissibility of expert testimony based upon clinical judgment and scientific research.

Economic Science And Hedonic Damage Analysis In Light Of Daubert V. Merrell Dow

Abstract No abstract available.

Mistaken identification: the eyewitness, psychology, and the law

1. Eyewitness identification errors 2. The admissibility of expert testimony on the psychology of eyewitness identification 3. Eyewitness experts in the courts of appeal 4. The scientific psychology of eyewitness identifications 5. Summarizing eyewitness research findings 6. Factors that influence eyewitness memory: witness factors 7. Factors that influence eyewitness memory: perpetrator and event factors 8. The effects of suggestive identification procedures on identification accuracy 9. Legal representation at identification procedures 10. Attorney sensitivity to factors influencing eyewitness reliability 11. Surveying lay knowledge about sources of eyewitness unreliability 12. The ability of jurors to differentiate accurate from inaccurate eyewitnesses 13. Jury sensitivity to factors that influence eyewitness reliability 14. Expert testimony and its possible impacts on the jury 15. Improving juror knowledge, integration and decision making 16. Court-appointed and opposing experts: better alternatives? 17. Instructing the jury about problems of mistaken identification.

The admissibility of expert testimony on the battered woman syndrome in homicide cases

This paper examines the issue of the battered woman syndrome in homicide cases where the woman killed her abuser. In particular, state appellate court decisions where the admissibility of the battered woman syndrome was a central issue are analyzed to determine the extent to which courts have been admitting or excluding expert testimony in these cases. Our findings suggest that although courts today are more willing to accept expert testimony on the battered woman syndrome, there is a lack of uniformity among the courts regarding the criteria utilized to determine admissibility.

Expert Psychiatric Evidence in Sexual Misconduct Cases Before State Medical Boards

The growing problem of physician sexual misconduct has captured the attention not only of the medical and legal communities, but of the public as well. State medical boards, administrative agencies with generous rules of evidence and varying levels of expertise, face the difficult task of responding to patients' allegations of physician sexual abuse. This Article, based in large part on the author's survey of current state medical board practice, reveals an increasing reliance on expert psychiatric testimony to explain the behavior of complainants and accused physicians. Drawing analogies from the use of psychiatric evidence in child sexual abuse cases, the author examines the factors that boards must consider in determining the admissibility of expert testimony in physician sexual misconduct cases, and calls upon states to establish clear evidentiary rules to govern the use of such testimony in administrative hearings.

Juror and Expert Conceptions of Battered Women

The admissibility of expert testimony at the trial of a battered woman defendant is very controversial. Some courts allow the testimony, others do not. This study focuses on two criteria judges use to determine admissibility and attempts to provide an empirical foundation that can assist their decisions. First, the area of study about which an expert testifies must be shown to be reliable and valid. Second, the subject matter of the testimony must be beyond the ken of the average juror. The first criterion was addressed by assessing the opinions of 45 researchers in the field of spousal violence. The second criterion was examined by evaluating the knowledge of 141 jurors about myths and empirical research findings associated with battered women. Results indicate that researchers showed strong consensus on 14 of 18 issues included in a survey about the reactions of abuse victims, and that compared to these "experts," jurors have limited knowledge on these issues. These results suggest that many of the scientific findings concerning battered women are reliable and that the information is often beyond the ken of the jury. The findings argue for the use of expert testimony in certain cases involving battered women defendants.

Expert witnesses in child abuse cases

AbstractThis article discusses the need for expert testimony and the criteria for admissibility of such testimony in child abuse cases. It addresses the scope of expert testimony in both physical and sexual abuse cases with respect to (a) descriptive and diagnostic issues, (b) witness credibility issues, and (c) legal issues. In particular, the article focuses on the admissibility of expert testimony on the battered child syndrome, the child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome, and observations of behavior with anatomically correct dolls. The article concludes that medical expert testimony is more admissible in court than mental health expert testimony.

Admission of Expert Testimony on Eyewitness Identification

Admission of Expert Testimony on Eyewitness Identification

Admission of Expert Testimony on Eyewitness Identification

Admission of Expert Testimony on Eyewitness Identification

Testifying on Eyewitness Reliability: Expert Advice Is Not Always Persuasive1

This study investigates the impact of different types of expert testimony regarding the unreliability of eyewitness identification. In two hypothetical court cases involving eyewitnesses, expert testimony was presented that was either sample‐based (presenting the results of a research program on eyewitness identification) or person‐based (presenting information about the particular eyewitness under consideration); the expert either offered causal explanations for his unreliability claim or failed to do so. Two additional control groups (with and without eye‐witness identification) were not presented with any expert testimony. The results indicate that subjects who had been confronted with an expert statement made more lenient judgments about the offender but did not discount the eyewitness identification completely. Sample‐based information had a moderate impact on the subjects' judgments, regardless of whether or not causal explanations were given. Person‐based testimony was the most influential type of expert advice when a causal explanation was provided but the least influential one when no reasons were given. The practical (international differences in admissibility of expert testimony) and theoretical implications (processing of base‐rate information) of these findings are discussed.

Checking the Allure of Increased Conviction Rates: The Admissibility of Expert Testimony on Rape Trauma Syndrome in Criminal Proceedings

Checking the Allure of Increased Conviction Rates: The Admissibility of Expert Testimony on Rape Trauma Syndrome in Criminal Proceedings

The Admissibility of Expert Testimony on Rape Trauma Syndrome

The Admissibility of Expert Testimony on Rape Trauma Syndrome

Investigative methods : James D. Scott. Prentice-Hall, Inc. (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey 07632), 1978, 325 pp., hardcover—$12.95.

A primary consideration regarding the admissibility of expert testimony in criminal trials is whether particular evidentiary issues are intuitively understood by jurors. Experiment 1 assessed the eyewitness identification accuracy and confidence of 287 retail store clerks, half of whom knew, while interacting with the target, that they would later be tested on their ability to identify that person. Two weeks later, each clerk/witness was tested on both a target absent and a target present lineup. In Experiment 2, 32 undergraduate students were given a detailed description of Experiment 1 and asked to postdict the clerks’ accuracy and confidence. Although individual students often erred in their absolute estimates, their postdictions were sensitive to the effects of the warning and lineup manipulations; on average their estimates largely approximated the direction and magnitude of the effects observed in the clerks’ data.