22 Connecticut opinions name it 3 courts 1990–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Connecticut courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Maher v. Quest Diagnostics, Inc.green2 sentences2011See Maher v. Quest Diagnostics, Inc., 269 Conn. 154 , 168 n.19, 847 A.2d 978 (2004) (“the standard articulated in Porter applies generally to scientific evidence, unless that scientific evidence is so well established that a threshold admissibility analysis is rendered unnecessary”); compare State v. Hasan, 205 Conn. 485 , 534 A.2d 877 (1987) (podiatrist’s testimony concerning probability that pair of sneakers would fit defendant’s feet not scientific evidence because jury could employ common sense and independent judgment to view and evaluate evidence). 2011See Maher v. Quest Diagnostics, Inc., 269 Conn. 154 , 168 n.19, 847 A.2d 978 (2004) (“the standard articulated in Porter applies generally to scientific evidence, unless that scientific evidence is so well established that a threshold admissibility analysis is rendered unnecessary”); compare State v. Hasan, 205 Conn. 485 , 534 A.2d 877 (1987) (podiatrist’s testimony concerning probability that pair of sneakers would fit defendant’s feet not scientific evidence because jury could employ common sense and independent judgment to view and evaluate evidence). | 1 | 5 |
State v. Hendersongreen2 sentences2020Significantly, we observed in Harris that ‘‘we stated in Guilbert ‘there is at best a weak correlation between a witness’ confidence in his or her identification and its accuracy’ . . . whereas the court in [State v. Hen- derson, 208 N.J. 208, 292 , 27 A.3d 872 (2011)] concluded that there is a correlation between high confidence at the time of the identification, before receiving any feedback or other information, and accuracy. . . . 2020Significantly, we observed in Harris that ‘‘we stated in Guilbert ‘there is at best a weak correlation between a witness’ confidence in his or her identification and its accuracy’ . . . whereas the court in [State v. Hen- derson, 208 N.J. 208, 292 , 27 A.3d 872 (2011)] concluded that there is a correlation between high confidence at the time of the identification, before receiving any feedback or other information, and accuracy. . . . | 1 | 3 |
State v. Kellygreen2 sentences2025Turning to the second prong (pertinence prong) of the admissibility test, we note that the declarant’s state- ments must be ‘‘pertinent to the [medical] diagnosis or treatment sought.’’ State v. Cruz, supra, 260 Conn. 6. ‘‘The term medical encompasses psychological as well as somatic illnesses and conditions’’; (internal quotation marks omitted) State v. Estrella J.C., 169 Conn. App. 56, 75, 148 A.3d 594 (2016); and, in sexual assault cases, ‘‘[statements] pertaining to the identity of the defendant and the nature of the sexual assault [are] . . . pertinent to proper diagnosis and treatment of 2025Turning to the second prong (pertinence prong) of the admissibility test, we note that the declarant’s state- ments must be ‘‘pertinent to the [medical] diagnosis or treatment sought.’’ State v. Cruz, supra, 260 Conn. 6. ‘‘The term medical encompasses psychological as well as somatic illnesses and conditions’’; (internal quotation marks omitted) State v. Estrella J.C., 169 Conn. App. 56, 75, 148 A.3d 594 (2016); and, in sexual assault cases, ‘‘[statements] pertaining to the identity of the defendant and the nature of the sexual assault [are] . . . pertinent to proper diagnosis and treatment of | 1 | 1 |
State v. Estrella J.C.green2 sentences2025Turning to the second prong (pertinence prong) of the admissibility test, we note that the declarant’s state- ments must be ‘‘pertinent to the [medical] diagnosis or treatment sought.’’ State v. Cruz, supra, 260 Conn. 6. ‘‘The term medical encompasses psychological as well as somatic illnesses and conditions’’; (internal quotation marks omitted) State v. Estrella J.C., 169 Conn. App. 56, 75, 148 A.3d 594 (2016); and, in sexual assault cases, ‘‘[statements] pertaining to the identity of the defendant and the nature of the sexual assault [are] . . . pertinent to proper diagnosis and treatment of 2025Turning to the second prong (pertinence prong) of the admissibility test, we note that the declarant’s state- ments must be ‘‘pertinent to the [medical] diagnosis or treatment sought.’’ State v. Cruz, supra, 260 Conn. 6. ‘‘The term medical encompasses psychological as well as somatic illnesses and conditions’’; (internal quotation marks omitted) State v. Estrella J.C., 169 Conn. App. 56, 75, 148 A.3d 594 (2016); and, in sexual assault cases, ‘‘[statements] pertaining to the identity of the defendant and the nature of the sexual assault [are] . . . pertinent to proper diagnosis and treatment of | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hasangreen2 sentences2011See Maher v. Quest Diagnostics, Inc., 269 Conn. 154 , 168 n.19, 847 A.2d 978 (2004) (“the standard articulated in Porter applies generally to scientific evidence, unless that scientific evidence is so well established that a threshold admissibility analysis is rendered unnecessary”); compare State v. Hasan, 205 Conn. 485 , 534 A.2d 877 (1987) (podiatrist’s testimony concerning probability that pair of sneakers would fit defendant’s feet not scientific evidence because jury could employ common sense and independent judgment to view and evaluate evidence). 2011See Maher v. Quest Diagnostics, Inc., 269 Conn. 154 , 168 n.19, 847 A.2d 978 (2004) (“the standard articulated in Porter applies generally to scientific evidence, unless that scientific evidence is so well established that a threshold admissibility analysis is rendered unnecessary”); compare State v. Hasan, 205 Conn. 485 , 534 A.2d 877 (1987) (podiatrist’s testimony concerning probability that pair of sneakers would fit defendant’s feet not scientific evidence because jury could employ common sense and independent judgment to view and evaluate evidence). | 1 | 1 |
Northeast Ct. Economic Alliance, Inc. v. ATC Partnershipgreen2 sentences2010See Northeast Ct. Economic Alliance, Inc. v. ATC Partnership, 272 Conn. 14, 32 , 861 A.2d 473 (2004). 2010See Northeast Ct. Economic Alliance, Inc. v. ATC Partnership, 272 Conn. 14, 32 , 861 A.2d 473 (2004). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Kalilgreen2 sentences2013But see State v. Kalil, 136 Conn. App. 454, 465-69 , 46 A.3d 272 (2012) (trial court admitted evidence to show defendant’s intent and to complete story, this court affirmed, holding evidence admissible to show defendant’s intent, but did not analyze for completing story, defendant sought certification from our Supreme Court, but did not seek certification as to admission of evidence for completing story, our Supreme Court granted certification as to both intent and completing story), cert. granted, 307 Conn. 955 , 59 A.3d 1191 (2013). 2013But see State v. Kalil, 136 Conn. App. 454, 465-69 , 46 A.3d 272 (2012) (trial court admitted evidence to show defendant’s intent and to complete story, this court affirmed, holding evidence admissible to show defendant’s intent, but did not analyze for completing story, defendant sought certification from our Supreme Court, but did not seek certification as to admission of evidence for completing story, our Supreme Court granted certification as to both intent and completing story), cert. granted, 307 Conn. 955 , 59 A.3d 1191 (2013). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Connecticut v. Porter
green
2 sentences2020The defendant could not prevail on his claim that the trial court improperly precluded the testimony of his expert witness: the expert’s proffered opinion that an individual in a stressful situation may overreact consti- tuted knowledge that was common to the average person and, thus, did not require expert testimony, and the defendant’s claim that the court improperly subjected the expert’s proffered opinions on certain physio- logical effects and blackouts caused by stressful situations to the stan- dard set forth in State v. Porter ( 241 Conn. 57 ) for the admissibility of scientific eviden 2018Following [ Porter ], scientific evidence, and expert testimony based thereon, usually is to be evaluated under a threshold admissibility standard [relating to] the reliability of the methodology underlying the evidence .... "[I]n State v. Porter , supra, 241 Conn. at 78 -80 , 698 A.2d 739 , we expressly recognized that, because the term scientific evidence houses such a large and diverse variety of topics, the formulation of a mechanical evidentiary standard of admissibility designed to apply universally to the many forms scientific evidence may take is an unworkable concept. | 7 | 2004–2020 |
Prentice v. Dalco Electric, Inc.
green
2 sentences2016Porter ... scientific evidence, and expert testimony based thereon, usually is to be evaluated under a threshold admissibility standard assessing the reliability of the methodology underlying the evidence and whether the evidence at issue is, in fact, derived from and based upon that methodology ...." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Prentice v. Dalco Elec., Inc. , 280 Conn. 336 , 342-43, 907 A.2d 1204 (2006), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 1266 , 127 S.Ct. 1494 , 167 L.Ed.2d 230 (2007). 2016Porter ... scientific evidence, and expert testimony based thereon, usually is to be evaluated under a threshold admissibility standard assessing the reliability of the methodology underlying the evidence and whether the evidence at issue is, in fact, derived from and based upon that methodology ...." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Prentice v. Dalco Elec., Inc. , 280 Conn. 336 , 342-43, 907 A.2d 1204 (2006), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 1266 , 127 S.Ct. 1494 , 167 L.Ed.2d 230 (2007). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Wheeler v. MO DIR. OF REVENUE
green
1 sentence2016Porter ... scientific evidence, and expert testimony based thereon, usually is to be evaluated under a threshold admissibility standard assessing the reliability of the methodology underlying the evidence and whether the evidence at issue is, in fact, derived from and based upon that methodology ...." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Prentice v. Dalco Elec., Inc. , 280 Conn. 336 , 342-43, 907 A.2d 1204 (2006), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 1266 , 127 S.Ct. 1494 , 167 L.Ed.2d 230 (2007). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Prentice v. Dalco Electric, Inc.
green
2 sentences2016Porter ... scientific evidence, and expert testimony based thereon, usually is to be evaluated under a threshold admissibility standard assessing the reliability of the methodology underlying the evidence and whether the evidence at issue is, in fact, derived from and based upon that methodology ...." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Prentice v. Dalco Elec., Inc. , 280 Conn. 336 , 342-43, 907 A.2d 1204 (2006), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 1266 , 127 S.Ct. 1494 , 167 L.Ed.2d 230 (2007). 2016Porter ... scientific evidence, and expert testimony based thereon, usually is to be evaluated under a threshold admissibility standard assessing the reliability of the methodology underlying the evidence and whether the evidence at issue is, in fact, derived from and based upon that methodology ...." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Prentice v. Dalco Elec., Inc. , 280 Conn. 336 , 342-43, 907 A.2d 1204 (2006), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 1266 , 127 S.Ct. 1494 , 167 L.Ed.2d 230 (2007). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Chasity West
green
2 sentences2014Following [Porter], scientific evidence, and expert testimony based thereon, usually is to be evaluated under a threshold admissibility standard assessing the reliability of the methodology underlying the evidence and whether the evidence at issue is, in fact, derived from and based upon that methodology . . . .’’ (Cita- tions omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. West, 274 Conn. 605, 630 , 877 A.2d 787 , cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1049 , 126 S. Ct. 775 , 163 L. 2014Following [Porter], scientific evidence, and expert testimony based thereon, usually is to be evaluated under a threshold admissibility standard assessing the reliability of the methodology underlying the evidence and whether the evidence at issue is, in fact, derived from and based upon that methodology . . . .’’ (Cita- tions omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. West, 274 Conn. 605, 630 , 877 A.2d 787 , cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1049 , 126 S. Ct. 775 , 163 L. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Price v. United States
green
1 sentence2014Following [Porter], scientific evidence, and expert testimony based thereon, usually is to be evaluated under a threshold admissibility standard assessing the reliability of the methodology underlying the evidence and whether the evidence at issue is, in fact, derived from and based upon that methodology . . . .’’ (Cita- tions omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. West, 274 Conn. 605, 630 , 877 A.2d 787 , cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1049 , 126 S. Ct. 775 , 163 L. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Lepsey v. United States
green
1 sentence2014Following [Porter], scientific evidence, and expert testimony based thereon, usually is to be evaluated under a threshold admissibility standard assessing the reliability of the methodology underlying the evidence and whether the evidence at issue is, in fact, derived from and based upon that methodology . . . .’’ (Cita- tions omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. West, 274 Conn. 605, 630 , 877 A.2d 787 , cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1049 , 126 S. Ct. 775 , 163 L. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Barron-Torres v. United States
green
1 sentence2014Following [Porter], scientific evidence, and expert testimony based thereon, usually is to be evaluated under a threshold admissibility standard assessing the reliability of the methodology underlying the evidence and whether the evidence at issue is, in fact, derived from and based upon that methodology . . . .’’ (Cita- tions omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. West, 274 Conn. 605, 630 , 877 A.2d 787 , cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1049 , 126 S. Ct. 775 , 163 L. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Kemp
green
2 sentences2010With respect to the admissibility of expert testimony on the reliability of eyewitness identifications, this court first addressed the issue nearly twenty-five years ago in State v. Kemp, supra, 199 Conn. at 473 , 507 A.2d 1387 . 2010With respect to the admissibility of expert testimony on the reliability of eyewitness identifications, this court first addressed the issue nearly twenty-five years ago in State v. Kemp, supra, 199 Conn. at 473 , 507 A.2d 1387 . | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
green
2 sentences2006“In [Porter], we adopted the test for determining the admissibility of scientific evidence set forth in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., [ 509 U.S. 579, 589-92 , 113 S. Ct. 2786 , 125 L. 2006“In [Porter], we adopted the test for determining the admissibility of scientific evidence set forth in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., [ 509 U.S. 579, 589-92 , 113 S. Ct. 2786 , 125 L. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Schallenkamp v. DelPonte
green
1 sentence1998The admissibility of the test tapes is controlled by Schallenkamp v. DelPonte , 229 Conn. 31 , 38-42 (1994), where the court held that the DMV hearing officer could rely on the certification of the testing equipment included in the A-44 even in the face of conflicting evidence. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
State v. Pennington
green
2 sentences1997In doing so, we follow in the footsteps of the many jurisdictions that, both before 20 and after 21 the Daubert decision, have chosen to reject the Frye standard as an absolute prerequisite to the admissibility of scientific evidence. 22 See, e.g., State v. Pennington, 327 N.C. 89, 98 , 393 S.E.2d 847 (1990) (admissibility of scientific evidence should be based on “the reliability of the scientific method rather than its popularity within a scientific community”). 3 We now turn to our reasons for concluding that the Daubert approach to the admissibility of scientific evidence is the proper app 1997In doing so, we follow in the footsteps of the many jurisdictions that, both before 20 and after 21 the Daubert decision, have chosen to reject the Frye standard as an absolute prerequisite to the admissibility of scientific evidence. 22 See, e.g., State v. Pennington, 327 N.C. 89, 98 , 393 S.E.2d 847 (1990) (admissibility of scientific evidence should be based on “the reliability of the scientific method rather than its popularity within a scientific community”). 3 We now turn to our reasons for concluding that the Daubert approach to the admissibility of scientific evidence is the proper app | 1 | 1997–1997 |
State v. Desso
neutral
2 sentences1990State v. Desso, 16 Conn. App. 165 , 547 A.2d 74 (1988), held that section 10 had to be complied with as part of the admissibility test. 1990State v. Desso, 16 Conn. App. 165 , 547 A.2d 74 (1988), held that section 10 had to be complied with as part of the admissibility test. | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.