12 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1981–2007 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Colorado 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 |
|---|---|---|
Frye v. United Statesred2 sentences1994Under Frye , courts are to determine if the scientific basis of an expert opinion is founded on “a well-recognized scientific principle or discovery [which has] gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.” Frye v. United States, 293 F. at 1014 . 1991Some courts have denied admission of such evidence because it “invades the province of the jury” or “usurps the function of the jury” in evaluating witness credibility. 4 Other courts have concluded that the proffered testimony is not in conformity with a scientific principle that has been generally accepted by experts in the field pursuant to the test developed in Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013, 1014 (D.C.Cir.1923). 5 Finally, some courts have reasoned that such expert testimony has the potential to unduly prejudice the jury, mislead the jury, or waste time. 6 As an alternative to the int | 4 | 9 |
Commonwealth v. Verdegreen2 sentences2007See, e.g., Perkins, 897 So.2d at 464 (autopsy report nontestimonial because it fell under a firmly rooted hearsay exception); Johnson, 18 Cal.Rptr.3d at 233 (lab report was simply "routine documentary evidence"); Verde, 827 N.E.2d at 705 ("Certificates of chemical analysis ... merely state the results of a well-recognized scientific test...."); Dedman, 102 P.3d at 635 (blood aleohol report admissible as a public record). 2006In Commonwealth v. Verde, supra, 444 Mass. at 283 , 827 N.E.2d at 705 , for example, the court explained that “[cjertificates of chemical analysis are neither discretionary nor based on opinion; rather, they merely state the results of a well-recognized scientific test determining the composition and quantity of the substance.” Thus, the court concluded, “we do not believe that the admission of these certificates of analysis implicate[s] ‘the principal evil at which the Confrontation Clause was directed.” ’ Commonwealth v. Verde, supra, 444 Mass. at 284 , 827 N.E.2d at 706 (quoting Crawford, s | 1 | 2 |
State v. Marchgreen1 sentence2007The Supreme Court in Crawford, however, abrogated reliability as the proper inquiry and divorced Confrontation Clause analysis from the rules of evidence. 541 U.S. at 61 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 ("Where testimonial statements are involved, we do not think the Framers meant to leave the Sixth Amendment's protection to the vagaries of the rules of evidence, much less to amorphous notions of 'reliability.' "); see also Thomas v. United States, 914 A.2d 1, 11 (D.C.2006); State v. March, 216 S.W.3d 663, 665-66 (Mo.2007). | 1 | 1 |
Perkins v. Stategreen1 sentence2007See, e.g., Perkins, 897 So.2d at 464 (autopsy report nontestimonial because it fell under a firmly rooted hearsay exception); Johnson, 18 Cal.Rptr.3d at 233 (lab report was simply "routine documentary evidence"); Verde, 827 N.E.2d at 705 ("Certificates of chemical analysis ... merely state the results of a well-recognized scientific test...."); Dedman, 102 P.3d at 635 (blood aleohol report admissible as a public record). | 1 | 1 |
Thomas v. United Statesgreen1 sentence2007The Supreme Court in Crawford, however, abrogated reliability as the proper inquiry and divorced Confrontation Clause analysis from the rules of evidence. 541 U.S. at 61 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 ("Where testimonial statements are involved, we do not think the Framers meant to leave the Sixth Amendment's protection to the vagaries of the rules of evidence, much less to amorphous notions of 'reliability.' "); see also Thomas v. United States, 914 A.2d 1, 11 (D.C.2006); State v. March, 216 S.W.3d 663, 665-66 (Mo.2007). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Johnsongreen1 sentence2007See, e.g., Perkins, 897 So.2d at 464 (autopsy report nontestimonial because it fell under a firmly rooted hearsay exception); Johnson, 18 Cal.Rptr.3d at 233 (lab report was simply "routine documentary evidence"); Verde, 827 N.E.2d at 705 ("Certificates of chemical analysis ... merely state the results of a well-recognized scientific test...."); Dedman, 102 P.3d at 635 (blood aleohol report admissible as a public record). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Dedmangreen1 sentence2007See, e.g., Perkins, 897 So.2d at 464 (autopsy report nontestimonial because it fell under a firmly rooted hearsay exception); Johnson, 18 Cal.Rptr.3d at 233 (lab report was simply "routine documentary evidence"); Verde, 827 N.E.2d at 705 ("Certificates of chemical analysis ... merely state the results of a well-recognized scientific test...."); Dedman, 102 P.3d at 635 (blood aleohol report admissible as a public record). | 1 | 1 |
Lindsey v. Peoplegreen1 sentence2001Fishback, 851 P.2d at 897 (Mullarkey, J., concurring in the result only); Lindsey, 892 P.2d at 296 (Mullarkey, J., concurring in the result only). | 1 | 1 |
Fishback v. Peoplegreen1 sentence2001Fishback, 851 P.2d at 897 (Mullarkey, J., concurring in the result only); Lindsey, 892 P.2d at 296 (Mullarkey, J., concurring in the result only). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Taylorgreen1 sentence1987Thus, the basic standard of Frye is general acceptance in the relevant scientific community. [6] The systolic blood pressure deception test, apparently the precursor to polygraph testing, measured blood pressure in an attempt to determine when the subject was being untruthful. [7] See Marks, 647 P.2d at 1299 ; Huey, 699 P.2d at 1294 ; Allewalt, 517 A.2d at 746 ; see also Taylor, 663 S.W.2d at 237, 240-41 (although testimony that the victim had been raped or suffered from rape trauma syndrome is inadmissible, rape trauma syndrome is generally accepted as a common reaction to sexual assault and | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Crawford v. Washington
green
2 sentences2006In Commonwealth v. Verde, supra, 444 Mass. at 283 , 827 N.E.2d at 705 , for example, the court explained that “[cjertificates of chemical analysis are neither discretionary nor based on opinion; rather, they merely state the results of a well-recognized scientific test determining the composition and quantity of the substance.” Thus, the court concluded, “we do not believe that the admission of these certificates of analysis implicate[s] ‘the principal evil at which the Confrontation Clause was directed.” ’ Commonwealth v. Verde, supra, 444 Mass. at 284 , 827 N.E.2d at 706 (quoting Crawford, s 2006In Commonwealth v. Verde, supra, 444 Mass. at 283 , 827 N.E.2d at 705 , for example, the court explained that “[cjertificates of chemical analysis are neither discretionary nor based on opinion; rather, they merely state the results of a well-recognized scientific test determining the composition and quantity of the substance.” Thus, the court concluded, “we do not believe that the admission of these certificates of analysis implicate[s] ‘the principal evil at which the Confrontation Clause was directed.” ’ Commonwealth v. Verde, supra, 444 Mass. at 284 , 827 N.E.2d at 706 (quoting Crawford, s | 2 | 2006–2007 |
People v. Fishback
green
1 sentence1992In People v. Fishback, 829 P.2d 489 (Colo.App.1991) (cert, granted May 11, 1992), this court recently held that the results of DNA testing are admissible both as opinion evidence which is founded on a well-recognized scientific principle which has gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs and as scientific evidence which will assist the jury in understanding the evidence or determining a fact at issue. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
State v. Chapple
red
2 sentences1991State v. Chapple, 135 Ariz. 281 , 660 P.2d 1208 (1983), and People v. McDonald, 37 Cal.3d 351 , 690 P.2d 709 , 208 Cal.Rptr. 236 (1984), are two state court cases that reversed the defendant’s conviction, holding that the trial court prejudicially abused its discretion by excluding expert testimony on factors affecting the accuracy of eyewitness identifications. 1991State v. Chapple, 135 Ariz. 281 , 660 P.2d 1208 (1983), and People v. McDonald, 37 Cal.3d 351 , 690 P.2d 709 , 208 Cal.Rptr. 236 (1984), are two state court cases that reversed the defendant’s conviction, holding that the trial court prejudicially abused its discretion by excluding expert testimony on factors affecting the accuracy of eyewitness identifications. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
People v. McDonald
green
2 sentences1991State v. Chapple, 135 Ariz. 281 , 660 P.2d 1208 (1983), and People v. McDonald, 37 Cal.3d 351 , 690 P.2d 709 , 208 Cal.Rptr. 236 (1984), are two state court cases that reversed the defendant’s conviction, holding that the trial court prejudicially abused its discretion by excluding expert testimony on factors affecting the accuracy of eyewitness identifications. 1991State v. Chapple, 135 Ariz. 281 , 660 P.2d 1208 (1983), and People v. McDonald, 37 Cal.3d 351 , 690 P.2d 709 , 208 Cal.Rptr. 236 (1984), are two state court cases that reversed the defendant’s conviction, holding that the trial court prejudicially abused its discretion by excluding expert testimony on factors affecting the accuracy of eyewitness identifications. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
People v. Anderson
green
1 sentence1990People v. Anderson, 637 P.2d 354 (Colo.1981) (evidence of polygraph test inadmissible). | 1 | 1990–1990 |
State v. Marks
green
1 sentence1987Thus, the basic standard of Frye is general acceptance in the relevant scientific community. [6] The systolic blood pressure deception test, apparently the precursor to polygraph testing, measured blood pressure in an attempt to determine when the subject was being untruthful. [7] See Marks, 647 P.2d at 1299 ; Huey, 699 P.2d at 1294 ; Allewalt, 517 A.2d at 746 ; see also Taylor, 663 S.W.2d at 237, 240-41 (although testimony that the victim had been raped or suffered from rape trauma syndrome is inadmissible, rape trauma syndrome is generally accepted as a common reaction to sexual assault and | 1 | 1987–1987 |
State v. Huey
green
1 sentence1987Thus, the basic standard of Frye is general acceptance in the relevant scientific community. [6] The systolic blood pressure deception test, apparently the precursor to polygraph testing, measured blood pressure in an attempt to determine when the subject was being untruthful. [7] See Marks, 647 P.2d at 1299 ; Huey, 699 P.2d at 1294 ; Allewalt, 517 A.2d at 746 ; see also Taylor, 663 S.W.2d at 237, 240-41 (although testimony that the victim had been raped or suffered from rape trauma syndrome is inadmissible, rape trauma syndrome is generally accepted as a common reaction to sexual assault and | 1 | 1987–1987 |
State v. Allewalt
green
1 sentence1987Thus, the basic standard of Frye is general acceptance in the relevant scientific community. [6] The systolic blood pressure deception test, apparently the precursor to polygraph testing, measured blood pressure in an attempt to determine when the subject was being untruthful. [7] See Marks, 647 P.2d at 1299 ; Huey, 699 P.2d at 1294 ; Allewalt, 517 A.2d at 746 ; see also Taylor, 663 S.W.2d at 237, 240-41 (although testimony that the victim had been raped or suffered from rape trauma syndrome is inadmissible, rape trauma syndrome is generally accepted as a common reaction to sexual assault and | 1 | 1987–1987 |
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.