Mustafa v. United States, 479 U.S. 953 (1986). · Go Syfert
Search
Mustafa v. United States, 479 U.S. 953 (1986). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“the judge has considerable room to exercise 'judgment”
40 citation events across 13 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Williams (usafctmilrev, 1992-07-07)
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986 2006 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) United States v. Williams
usafctmilrev · 1992 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
the judge has considerable room to exercise 'judgment
discussed Cited "see" State v. Gleason (2×)
Idaho · 1992 · signal: see · confidence high
See Mustafa v. United States, 479 U.S. 953 , 107 S.Ct. 444 , 93 L.Ed.2d 392 (1986) (White, J., joined by Brennan, J., dissenting on denial of petition for writ of certiorari on the ground that the Court should resolve the split in authority over the applicability of the Frye test to a rule 702 analysis).
discussed Cited "see" Christophersen v. Allied-Signal Corp.
5th Cir. · 1991 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Mustafa, 22 M.J. 165 (C.M.A.) (holding that enactment of Federal Rules superseded Frye test), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 953 , 107 S.Ct. 444 , 444-45, 93 L.Ed.2d 392 (1986) (White, J., & Brennan, J., dissenting) (noting need to resolve conflict in circuits over whether Rule 702 superseded or incorporated Frye).
discussed Cited "see" Christophersen v. Allied-Signal Corporation
5th Cir. · 1991 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Mustafa, 22 M.J. 165 (C.M.A.) (holding that enactment of Federal Rules superseded Frye test), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 953 , 107 S.Ct. 444 , 444-45, 93 L.Ed.2d 392 (1986) (White, J., & Brennan, J., dissenting) (noting need to resolve conflict in circuits over whether Rule 702 superseded or incorporated Frye ).
cited Cited "see" United States v. Gipson
cma · 1987 · signal: see · confidence high
United States v. Snipes, 18 M.J. 172, 178 (C.M.A. 1984); see United States v. Mustafa, 22 M.J. 165, 167-68 (C.M.A.), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 107 S.Ct. 444 , 93 L.Ed.2d 392 (1986).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Ian Lightbourne v. Richard L. Dugger, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General (2×)
11th Cir. · 1987 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also DeAngelo v. Wainwright, 781 F.2d 1516 (11th Cir.), cert, denied, — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 444 , 93 L.Ed.2d 392 (1986).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mustafa, aka Brown
v.
United States
No. 86-143.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 10, 1986.
479 U.S. 953
Brennan, White, Whom.
Cited by 10 opinions  |  Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 60%
Citer courts: U S Air Force Court of Militar… (1)

Lead Opinion

Ct. Mil. App. Certiorari denied.

Dissent

Justice White, with whom Justice Brennan joins,

dissenting.

In this case the trial court admitted, over petitioner’s objection, the testimony of a purported expert on blood spatter techniques. On appeal, the Court of Military Appeals held that the testimony in question was admissible under Military Rule of Evidence 702, which is worded identically to Federal Rule of Evidence 702. The court held that the so-called Frye test for determining the admissibility of expert testimony, see Frye v. United States, 54 App. D. C. 46, 47, 293 F. 1013, 1014 (1923), was superseded by the 1975 enactment of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The court described Military Rule 702 as establishing a much lower threshold than Frye for determining whether a given person is an expert. This conclusion is supported by decisions interpreting Federal Rule of Evidence 702 as establishing a more flexible standard of admissibility than the Frye test. See, e. g., United States v. Downing, 753 F. 2d 1224 (CA3 1985). Other courts, however, have interpreted Federal Rule of Evidence 702 as incorporating the Frye test. Barrel of Fun, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 739 F. 2d 1028, 1031, n. 9 (CA5 1984); United States v. McBride, 786 F. 2d 45, 49 (CA2 1986). I would grant certiorari to resolve this conflict on an obviously recurring and important issue.