scientific principle in Michigan

2017MRE 702 “requires trial judges to act as gatekeepers who must exclude unreliable expert testimony.” Lenawee Co v Wagley, 301 Mich App 134, 162 ; 836 NW2d 193 (2013).

2017MRE 702 “requires trial judges to act as gatekeepers who must exclude unreliable expert testimony.” Lenawee Co v Wagley, 301 Mich App 134, 162 ; 836 NW2d 193 (2013).

2016Rather, as Oberle explained, his opinions were derived from his extensive experience with Saginaw gang activity.114 Oberle’s experience provided a sufficient basis for his opinions. 114 Swilley seems to contend that the trial court was required to apply the factors described in Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharm, Inc, 509 US 579, 589 ; 113 S Ct 2786 ; 125 L Ed 2d 469 (1993), before admitting Oberle’s opinion.

2016Rather, as Oberle explained, his opinions were derived from his extensive experience with Saginaw gang activity.114 Oberle’s experience provided a sufficient basis for his opinions. 114 Swilley seems to contend that the trial court was required to apply the factors described in Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharm, Inc, 509 US 579, 589 ; 113 S Ct 2786 ; 125 L Ed 2d 469 (1993), before admitting Oberle’s opinion.

1986I also disagree with the result in In the Matter of Rinesmith, 144 Mich App 475, 481 ; 376 NW2d 139 (1985), which determined that the response of a child using anatomically correct dolls does not rise to the level of a scientific test subject to the so-called Frye/Davis rule.

1986I also disagree with the result in In the Matter of Rinesmith, 144 Mich App 475, 481 ; 376 NW2d 139 (1985), which determined that the response of a child using anatomically correct dolls does not rise to the level of a scientific test subject to the so-called Frye/Davis rule.

2017Although human blood, with its unique genetic properties, may initially be quantitatively different from such evidence, once constitutional concerns have been satisfied, a blood sample is not unlike other tangible property which can be subject to a battery of scientific tests. ... [ State v. Barkley , 144 N.C.

1990Frye, p 47. [4] Factors which might be relevant in making this determination would be analogous to those set forth in People v Kachar, 400 Mich 78, 95-96 ; 252 NW2d 807 (1977).

1990Frye, p 47. [4] Factors which might be relevant in making this determination would be analogous to those set forth in People v Kachar, 400 Mich 78, 95-96 ; 252 NW2d 807 (1977).

1985In People v Davis, 343 Mich 348 ; 72 NW2d 269 (1955), our Supreme Court similarly acknowledged that because of the tremendous weight the results of "scientific tests” could carry with a jury, the results of such tests were to be admitted into evidence only if the accuracy of such tests had gained general scientific acceptance and standardization. 343 Mich 372 .

1985In People v Davis, 343 Mich 348 ; 72 NW2d 269 (1955), our Supreme Court similarly acknowledged that because of the tremendous weight the results of "scientific tests” could carry with a jury, the results of such tests were to be admitted into evidence only if the accuracy of such tests had gained general scientific acceptance and standardization. 343 Mich 372 .

1985In State v Marks, 231 Kan 645; 647 P2d 1292 (1982), the Kansas Supreme Court, applying the Frye test, concluded that rape trauma syndrome was generally accepted to be a common reaction to sexual assault and that it is relevant and admissible where the defense is consent. 231 Kan 654.

1983In Frye v United States, 54 US App DC 46, 47; 293 F 1013 (1923), a standard for admissibility of scientific evidence was articulated: "[W]hile courts will go a long way in admitting expert testimony deduced from a well-recognized scientific principle or discovery, the thing from which the deduction is made must be sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.” In People v Becker, 300 Mich 562 ; 2 NW2d 503 (1942), Justice Sharpe, writing for a unanimous Court, concluded that the results of a lie-detector test offered by defendant to prov

1983In Frye v United States, 54 US App DC 46, 47; 293 F 1013 (1923), a standard for admissibility of scientific evidence was articulated: "[W]hile courts will go a long way in admitting expert testimony deduced from a well-recognized scientific principle or discovery, the thing from which the deduction is made must be sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.” In People v Becker, 300 Mich 562 ; 2 NW2d 503 (1942), Justice Sharpe, writing for a unanimous Court, concluded that the results of a lie-detector test offered by defendant to prov

1978"This follows the traditional test used in other jurisdictions, which, as originally set forth in Frye v United *317 States, 54 US App DC 46, 47; 293 F 1013, 1014 (1923), requires: " '[W]hile courts will go a long way in admitting expert testimony deduced from a well-recognized scientific principle or discovery, the thing from which the deduction is made must be sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.’ ” 400 Mich at 357-358 .

1964The general court may have felt that it was wise and just with reference to owners of liquor and prospective defendants, as well as to the general public, to provide for an impartial analysis by a public officer in order that the fact of alcoholic content in liquor seized might be established according to a scientific standard in which confidence might be reposed.' "In Bowman v. Commonwealth, 201 Va 656 ( 112 SE2d 887 ), a sample of blood drawn from one accused of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor was sent by mail to *614 the chief medical examiner of t

1964The general court may have felt that it was wise and just with reference to owners of liquor and prospective defendants, as well as to the general public, to provide for an impartial analysis by a public officer in order that the fact of alcoholic content in liquor seized might be established according to a scientific standard in which confidence might be reposed.’ “In Bowman v. Commonwealth, 201 Va 656 ( 112 SE2d 887 ), a sample of blood drawn from one accused of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor was sent by mail to the chief medical examiner of the St

1949“We think the systolic blood pressure deception test has not yet gained such standing and scientific recognition among the physiological and psychological authorities as would justify the courts in admitting expert testimony deduced from the discovery, development, and experiments thus far made.” Frye v. United States, 54 App DC 46 (293 F 1013, 34 ALR 145 ).