EVIDENCE—BASES OF OPINION TESTIMONY BY EXPERTS

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
RECONSTRUCTION EVIDENCE Judge Lynn M. Egan Mr. Gary W. Cooper March 28, 2014.
Advertisements

Experts & Expert Reports  Experts and the FRE  FRCP, Rule 26 and experts  How are experts used in patent litigation?  What belongs in a Rule 26 report?
CJ227 Criminal Procedure Welcome to our Seminar!!! (We will begin shortly) Tonight – Unit 4 (Chapter 9 – Pretrial Motions, Hearings and Pleas) (Chapter.
Mock Trial Modified by Dennis Gerl from Evidence PPT by John Ed-Bishop
Evidence and Argument Evidence – The asserted facts that the arbitrator will consider in making a decision – Information – What is presented at the hearing.
Expert Testimony. What’s the expert’s role FOC Proffered Evidence Evidentiary Hypothesis P thumb numb Thumb numbness makes it SML that spine was injured.
Hearsay Rule Lecture 6, 2014.
OPINION EVIDENCE. OPINION EVIDENCE FRE Evid. Code §§
TRIAL INFORMATION Steps, vocabulary.
Forensic Science and the Law
Confidential: Attorney-Client Privilege and Attorney Work Product Houston ● Dallas How to Offer and Exclude Evidence:
 Judge  Prosecutor  Defense Attorney 2 Copyright Texas Education Agency (TEA)
Discovery III Expert Witness Disclosure And Discovery Motions & Sanctions.
Expert Witnesses Texas Rules of Evidence Article VII. Opinions and Expert Testimony Judge Sharen Wilson.
AJ 104 Chapter 5 Witnesses. 5 Issues Related to a Trial Witness 1. Who is competent to testify 2. How the credibility of a witness is attacked 3. What.
Trial Procedures II CLN4U. The Judge, The Crown, The Defence Judge: Judge: Impartial and unbiased Impartial and unbiased Applies law to case, instructs.
Trial advocacy workshop
1. Evidence Professor Cioffi 2/22/2011 – 2/23/
Unit 3 Seminar! K. Austin Zimmer Any question from Unit 2! Please make sure you have completed your Unit 1 & 2 Papers!
Basic Evidence and Trial Procedure. Opening Statement  Preview the evidence “The evidence will show”  Introduce theme  Briefly describe the issues,
Bowoto v. Chevron Corp. N.D. Cal. Jun. 12, WL Presented by Joe Siclari.
The Trial. I. Procedures A. Jury Selection 1. Impanel (select) a jury 2. Prosecutors and Defense lawyers pose questions to potential jurors (VOIR DIRE)
Mon. Nov. 26. Work Product “Privilege” A witness, X, who is friendly to the D was interviewed by P’s attorney and a statement was drawn up Is there any.
1 PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE Learning Domain PURPOSE FOR THE RULES OF EVIDENCE Protect the jury from seeing or hearing evidence that is: (w/b p. 1-3)
Cross examination Is the DNA a mixture of two or more people? How did you calculate the match statistic? What is the scientific basis of that calculation?
1 What Is Scientific Evidence? Scientific evidence is most often presented in court by an expert witness testifying on expert opinions. It also includes.
ARKANSAS LEGAL AID OCTOBER 17, 2013 BY MICHAEL JOHNSON AND PAULA CASEY EXHIBITS.
Evidence and Expert Testimony. Expert Testimony  Two Types of Witnesses: Fact and Expert  Fact -- have personal knowledge of facts of case  Cannot.
Professor Guy Wellborn
1 Law of Evidence Mark Pollitt Associate Professor.
PROCEDURES IN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM, 8 th ed. Roberson, Wallace, and Stuckey PRENTICE HALL ©2007 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ
CJ305 Criminal Evidence Welcome to our Seminar!!! (We will begin shortly) Tonight – Unit 3 (Chapter 5 – Witnesses -- Lay & Expert) (Chapter 6 – Credibility.
CJ227: Criminal Procedure Unit 6 Seminar Mary K Cronin.
Hugh Finkelstein Chief Deputy Prosecuting Attorney 20 th Judicial District of Arkansas.
Mock Trial Rules of Evidence Arkansas Bar Association Mock Trial Committee Anthony L. McMullen, J.D., Vice Chair ( )
Hearsay in Illinois and some other stuff Hon. Stuart E. Palmer (Ret
Family Law Forum Idaho Law and Parenting Time Evaluations
Mock Trials Court Systems and Practices.
Chapter 1 Structure of the Trial & Presentation of Evidence
Start Figure 7.10 Trial by Jury, p. 183 End.
50 Minutes Session 23 Curriculum Vitae Preparation and Maintenance.
Session 23 Curriculum Vitae Preparation and Maintenance 50 Minutes
Also known as the ‘accusatorial’ system.
OPINION RULE.
WHAT IS EVIDENCE TESTIMONY OF WITNESSES DOCUMENTS
What Is Scientific Evidence?
Law of Evidence OPINION EVIDENCE 2/12/2014 Chapter 8.
Chapter Sixteen Rules of Evidence  .
QUALIFICATIONS, PRESENTATION AND CHALLENGES TO EXPERT TESTIMONY DAUBERT (i.e. is a DFPS caseworker an expert)    8TH ANNUAL: ADJUSTING THE BAR: THE DEFINITIVE.
J. Max Wawrik Nancy Rosado Colon Law 16 Spring 2017
State of Oregon v. Willy Freeman
Rules of Evidence Miss Orr.
"Seasoned" Superior Court Judges
HEARSAY DEFINITIONS [RULE 801, PARED DOWN].
DEFENDING A DFPS CASE : TRIAL: PARENTS CASE
OBJECTIONS.
FIDO Program: Legal Considerations
Opinion Testimony, In General
How Witnesses are Examined
"Seasoned" Superior Court Judges
Start Figure 7.10 Trial by Jury, p. 183 End.
Objections Criminal law – unit #3.
Inn of Court: Trial Practices
THE STEALTH RULES OF EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE—BASES OF OPINION TESTIMONY BY EXPERTS
Objections How, when, why…...
Civil Pretrial Practice
What is Relevant Evidence?
Law 12 Criminal Trial Process.
Alison Chandler Hearsay Exceptions Continued Unavailability Former testimony Dying Declarations Declarations against.
Presentation transcript:

EVIDENCE—BASES OF OPINION TESTIMONY BY EXPERTS WHAT A TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD KNOW 11/29/2018 Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003

Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003 RULE 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. 11/29/2018 Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003

Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003 Topics of Discussion Rule 703 Rule 703 inquiries Hearsay analysis Relevancy analysis Rule 705 Limiting instructions 11/29/2018 Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003

Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003 RULE 703 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 him 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. 11/29/2018 Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003

Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003 RULE 703 INQUIRIES 1. Has the witness been tendered and accepted as an expert? 2. In what field is defendant qualified to testify as an expert? 3. Are the facts or data of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the particular field? 4. Are the facts or data relevant to the opinion? 11/29/2018 Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003

Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003 HEARSAY ANALYSIS 1. An out-of-court statement offered for a purpose other than to prove the truth of the matter asserted is not considered hearsay. Rule 801 (c); State v. Shepherd, 575 S.E.2d 776(2003). 2. Such evidence is admissible for the limited purpose for which it was offered and not as an exception to the hearsay rule. Id. 11/29/2018 Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003

Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003 RELEVANCY ANALYSIS 1. Rule 403—Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence. See State v. Coffey, 336 N.C. 412(1994); State v. Wallace, 351 N.C. 481(2000). 11/29/2018 Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003

Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003 RULE 705 The expert may testify in terms of opinion or inference and give his reasons without prior disclosure of the underlying facts or data unless an adverse party requests otherwise, in which event the expert will be required to disclose such underlying facts or data on direct exam or voir dire before stating the opinion. Disclosure may be required on cross-exam without a request. Hypothetical questions are not required.See State v.Wallace,351 N.C. 481(2000);State v. Pretty, 134 N.C.App. 379(1999). 11/29/2018 Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003

LIMITING INSTRUCTIONS If the testimony is being offered for the limited purpose of establishing the basis for the expert’s opinion, and does not meet an exception to the hearsay rules: the court should, upon request, give a limiting instruction pursuant to Rule 105. Refer to N.C.P.I.Crim 104.96;Civil 101.33;Motor Vehicle 101.33. See State v. Jones, 322 N.C. 406(1988). 11/29/2018 Kimberly S. Taylor Fall Superior Court Judge's Conference 2003