Daubert test in Colorado

6 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1999–2021 1 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.

Followed or applied (25)

Case	Followed	Cited
United States v. Horngreen mdd · 2002 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2021 2 sentences 2021App. 1994) (HGN test results admissible under Texas Rule of Criminal Evidence 702; applying Daubert-like test); see also United States v. Horn, 185 F. Supp. 2d 530, 561 (D. 2020App. 1994) (HGN test results admissible under Texas Rule of Criminal Evidence 702; applying Daubert-like test); see also United States v. Horn, 185 F. Supp. 2d 530, 561 (D.	2	2
State v. Dahoodgreen nh · 2002 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2021 2 sentences 2021App. 1995) (courts may take judicial notice of the results of an HGN test); State v. Klawitter, 518 N.W.2d 577, 584-86 (Minn. 1994) (HGN test results satisfied Frye test); State v. Hill, 865 S.W.2d 702, 703-04 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993) (HGN test satisfies Frye test if offered as evidence of intoxication), overruled on other grounds by State v. Carson, 941 S.W.2d 518 (Mo. 1997); Baue, 607 N.W.2d at 201-04 (HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment under Frye test); Dahood, 814 A.2d at 166-67 (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); State v. Aleman, 194 P.3d 110, 115-16 (N.M. 2020App. 1995) (courts may take judicial notice of the results of an HGN test); State v. Klawitter, 518 N.W.2d 577, 584-86 (Minn. 1994) (HGN test results satisfied Frye test); State v. Hill, 865 S.W.2d 702, 703-04 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993) (HGN test satisfies Frye test if offered as evidence of intoxication), overruled on other grounds by State v. Carson, 941 S.W.2d 518 (Mo. 1997); Baue, 607 N.W.2d at 201 -04 22 (HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment under Frye test); Dahood, 814 A.2d at 166-67 (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); State v. Aleman, 194 P.3d 110, 115-16 (N.M.	2	2
State v. Alemangreen nmctapp · 2008 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2021 2 sentences 2021App. 1995) (courts may take judicial notice of the results of an HGN test); State v. Klawitter, 518 N.W.2d 577, 584-86 (Minn. 1994) (HGN test results satisfied Frye test); State v. Hill, 865 S.W.2d 702, 703-04 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993) (HGN test satisfies Frye test if offered as evidence of intoxication), overruled on other grounds by State v. Carson, 941 S.W.2d 518 (Mo. 1997); Baue, 607 N.W.2d at 201-04 (HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment under Frye test); Dahood, 814 A.2d at 166-67 (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); State v. Aleman, 194 P.3d 110, 115-16 (N.M. 2020App. 1995) (courts may take judicial notice of the results of an HGN test); State v. Klawitter, 518 N.W.2d 577, 584-86 (Minn. 1994) (HGN test results satisfied Frye test); State v. Hill, 865 S.W.2d 702, 703-04 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993) (HGN test satisfies Frye test if offered as evidence of intoxication), overruled on other grounds by State v. Carson, 941 S.W.2d 518 (Mo. 1997); Baue, 607 N.W.2d at 201 -04 22 (HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment under Frye test); Dahood, 814 A.2d at 166-67 (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); State v. Aleman, 194 P.3d 110, 115-16 (N.M.	2	2
State v. O'Keygreen or · 1995 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2021 2 sentences 2021Ct. App. 2008) (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); City of Fargo v. McLaughlin, 512 N.W.2d 700, 703-08 (N.D. 1994) (HGN test results admissible under Frye test if offered in conjunction with other field sobriety tests); State v. O’Key, 899 P.2d 663, 689 (Or. 1995) (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); Emerson v. State, 880 S.W.2d 759, 763-69 (Tex. Crim. 2020Ct. App. 2008) (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); City of Fargo v. McLaughlin, 512 N.W.2d 700, 703-08 (N.D. 1994) (HGN test results admissible under Frye test if offered in conjunction with other field sobriety tests); State v. O’Key, 899 P.2d 663, 689 (Or. 1995) (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); Emerson v. State, 880 S.W.2d 759, 763-69 (Tex. Crim.	2	2
State v. Comminsgreen connappct · 2004 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2021 2 sentences 2021Hamilton v. City Ct., 799 P.2d 855, 859 (Ariz. 1990) (HGN test satisfies the Frye standard if offered only as evidence of impairment); State v. Commins, 850 A.2d 1074, 1080-81 (Conn. App. Ct. 2004) (HGN test evidence satisfied Daubert test), aff’d on other grounds, 886 A.2d 824 (Conn. 2005); Ruthardt, 680 A.2d at 356-60 (applying Shreck-like test; HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment); Williams v. State, 710 So. 2d 24, 30-32 (Fla. Dist. 2020See, e.g., Ballard v. State, 955 P.2d 931, 940 (Alaska Ct. App. 1998) (HGN evidence meets Frye test if results are offered to show a person has consumed alcohol and is potentially impaired), overruled on other grounds as recognized by Alvarez v. State, 249 P.3d 286 (Alaska 2011); State v. City Court, 799 P.2d 855, 859 (Ariz. 1990) (HGN test satisfies the Frye standard if offered only as evidence of impairment); State v. Commins, 850 A.2d 1074, 1080-81 (Conn. App. Ct. 2004) (HGN test evidence satisfied Daubert test), 4 As noted above, the prosecution cited several trial court decisions admittin	2	2
Emerson v. Stategreen texcrimapp · 1994 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2021 2 sentences 2021Ct. App. 2008) (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); City of Fargo v. McLaughlin, 512 N.W.2d 700, 703-08 (N.D. 1994) (HGN test results admissible under Frye test if offered in conjunction with other field sobriety tests); State v. O’Key, 899 P.2d 663, 689 (Or. 1995) (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); Emerson v. State, 880 S.W.2d 759, 763-69 (Tex. Crim. 2020Ct. App. 2008) (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); City of Fargo v. McLaughlin, 512 N.W.2d 700, 703-08 (N.D. 1994) (HGN test results admissible under Frye test if offered in conjunction with other field sobriety tests); State v. O’Key, 899 P.2d 663, 689 (Or. 1995) (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); Emerson v. State, 880 S.W.2d 759, 763-69 (Tex. Crim.	2	2
City of Fargo v. McLaughlingreen nd · 1994 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2021 2 sentences 2021Ct. App. 2008) (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); City of Fargo v. McLaughlin, 512 N.W.2d 700, 703-08 (N.D. 1994) (HGN test results admissible under Frye test if offered in conjunction with other field sobriety tests); State v. O’Key, 899 P.2d 663, 689 (Or. 1995) (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); Emerson v. State, 880 S.W.2d 759, 763-69 (Tex. Crim. 2020Ct. App. 2008) (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); City of Fargo v. McLaughlin, 512 N.W.2d 700, 703-08 (N.D. 1994) (HGN test results admissible under Frye test if offered in conjunction with other field sobriety tests); State v. O’Key, 899 P.2d 663, 689 (Or. 1995) (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); Emerson v. State, 880 S.W.2d 759, 763-69 (Tex. Crim.	2	2
State v. Hillgreen moctapp · 1993 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2021 2 sentences 2021App. 1995) (courts may take judicial notice of the results of an HGN test); State v. Klawitter, 518 N.W.2d 577, 584-86 (Minn. 1994) (HGN test results satisfied Frye test); State v. Hill, 865 S.W.2d 702, 703-04 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993) (HGN test satisfies Frye test if offered as evidence of intoxication), overruled on other grounds by State v. Carson, 941 S.W.2d 518 (Mo. 1997); Baue, 607 N.W.2d at 201-04 (HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment under Frye test); Dahood, 814 A.2d at 166-67 (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); State v. Aleman, 194 P.3d 110, 115-16 (N.M. 2020App. 1995) (courts may take judicial notice of the results of an HGN test); State v. Klawitter, 518 N.W.2d 577, 584-86 (Minn. 1994) (HGN test results satisfied Frye test); State v. Hill, 865 S.W.2d 702, 703-04 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993) (HGN test satisfies Frye test if offered as evidence of intoxication), overruled on other grounds by State v. Carson, 941 S.W.2d 518 (Mo. 1997); Baue, 607 N.W.2d at 201 -04 22 (HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment under Frye test); Dahood, 814 A.2d at 166-67 (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); State v. Aleman, 194 P.3d 110, 115-16 (N.M.	2	2
State Ex Rel. Hamilton v. City Court of City of Mesagreen ariz · 1990 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2021 2 sentences 2021Hamilton v. City Ct., 799 P.2d 855, 859 (Ariz. 1990) (HGN test satisfies the Frye standard if offered only as evidence of impairment); State v. Commins, 850 A.2d 1074, 1080-81 (Conn. App. Ct. 2004) (HGN test evidence satisfied Daubert test), aff’d on other grounds, 886 A.2d 824 (Conn. 2005); Ruthardt, 680 A.2d at 356-60 (applying Shreck-like test; HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment); Williams v. State, 710 So. 2d 24, 30-32 (Fla. Dist. 2020See, e.g., Ballard v. State, 955 P.2d 931, 940 (Alaska Ct. App. 1998) (HGN evidence meets Frye test if results are offered to show a person has consumed alcohol and is potentially impaired), overruled on other grounds as recognized by Alvarez v. State, 249 P.3d 286 (Alaska 2011); State v. City Court, 799 P.2d 855, 859 (Ariz. 1990) (HGN test satisfies the Frye standard if offered only as evidence of impairment); State v. Commins, 850 A.2d 1074, 1080-81 (Conn. App. Ct. 2004) (HGN test evidence satisfied Daubert test), 4 As noted above, the prosecution cited several trial court decisions admittin	2	2
State v. Klawittergreen minn · 1994 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2021 2 sentences 2021App. 1995) (courts may take judicial notice of the results of an HGN test); State v. Klawitter, 518 N.W.2d 577, 584-86 (Minn. 1994) (HGN test results satisfied Frye test); State v. Hill, 865 S.W.2d 702, 703-04 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993) (HGN test satisfies Frye test if offered as evidence of intoxication), overruled on other grounds by State v. Carson, 941 S.W.2d 518 (Mo. 1997); Baue, 607 N.W.2d at 201-04 (HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment under Frye test); Dahood, 814 A.2d at 166-67 (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); State v. Aleman, 194 P.3d 110, 115-16 (N.M. 2020App. 1995) (courts may take judicial notice of the results of an HGN test); State v. Klawitter, 518 N.W.2d 577, 584-86 (Minn. 1994) (HGN test results satisfied Frye test); State v. Hill, 865 S.W.2d 702, 703-04 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993) (HGN test satisfies Frye test if offered as evidence of intoxication), overruled on other grounds by State v. Carson, 941 S.W.2d 518 (Mo. 1997); Baue, 607 N.W.2d at 201 -04 22 (HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment under Frye test); Dahood, 814 A.2d at 166-67 (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); State v. Aleman, 194 P.3d 110, 115-16 (N.M.	2	2
Williams v. Stategreen fladistctapp · 1998 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2021 2 sentences 2021Hamilton v. City Ct., 799 P.2d 855, 859 (Ariz. 1990) (HGN test satisfies the Frye standard if offered only as evidence of impairment); State v. Commins, 850 A.2d 1074, 1080-81 (Conn. App. Ct. 2004) (HGN test evidence satisfied Daubert test), aff’d on other grounds, 886 A.2d 824 (Conn. 2005); Ruthardt, 680 A.2d at 356-60 (applying Shreck-like test; HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment); Williams v. State, 710 So. 2d 24, 30-32 (Fla. Dist. 2020Marston has never disputed the point that Colorado trial courts regularly admit such evidence. 21 aff’d on other grounds, 886 A.2d 824 (Conn. 2005); Ruthardt, 680 A.2d at 356-60 (applying Shreck-like test; HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment); Williams v. State, 710 So. 2d 24, 30-32 (Fla. Dist.	2	2
State v. Bauegreen neb · 2000 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2021 2 sentences 2021App. 1995) (courts may take judicial notice of the results of an HGN test); State v. Klawitter, 518 N.W.2d 577, 584-86 (Minn. 1994) (HGN test results satisfied Frye test); State v. Hill, 865 S.W.2d 702, 703-04 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993) (HGN test satisfies Frye test if offered as evidence of intoxication), overruled on other grounds by State v. Carson, 941 S.W.2d 518 (Mo. 1997); Baue, 607 N.W.2d at 201-04 (HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment under Frye test); Dahood, 814 A.2d at 166-67 (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); State v. Aleman, 194 P.3d 110, 115-16 (N.M. 2020App. 1995) (courts may take judicial notice of the results of an HGN test); State v. Klawitter, 518 N.W.2d 577, 584-86 (Minn. 1994) (HGN test results satisfied Frye test); State v. Hill, 865 S.W.2d 702, 703-04 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993) (HGN test satisfies Frye test if offered as evidence of intoxication), overruled on other grounds by State v. Carson, 941 S.W.2d 518 (Mo. 1997); Baue, 607 N.W.2d at 201 -04 22 (HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment under Frye test); Dahood, 814 A.2d at 166-67 (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); State v. Aleman, 194 P.3d 110, 115-16 (N.M.	1	2
Schultz v. Stategreen mdctspecapp · 1995 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021 1 sentence 2021Ct. App. 1998) (the HGN test is a reliable indicator of the presence of alcohol in blood, and there is no need for trial courts to reapply a Frye analysis to HGN); Hawkins v. State, 476 S.E.2d 803, 806-08 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996) (HGN test results admissible without expert testimony regarding the scientific validity of the test; applying a Shreck-like totality of the circumstances test); State v. Gleason, 844 P.2d 691, 694-95 (Idaho 1992) (HGN testimony admissible under Frye test as evidence of impairment); State v. Taylor, 694 A.2d 907, 911-12 (Me. 1997) (applying Frye 23 test; HGN test results ad	1	1
State v. Gleasongreen idaho · 1992 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021 1 sentence 2021Ct. App. 1998) (the HGN test is a reliable indicator of the presence of alcohol in blood, and there is no need for trial courts to reapply a Frye analysis to HGN); Hawkins v. State, 476 S.E.2d 803, 806-08 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996) (HGN test results admissible without expert testimony regarding the scientific validity of the test; applying a Shreck-like totality of the circumstances test); State v. Gleason, 844 P.2d 691, 694-95 (Idaho 1992) (HGN testimony admissible under Frye test as evidence of impairment); State v. Taylor, 694 A.2d 907, 911-12 (Me. 1997) (applying Frye 23 test; HGN test results ad	1	1
State v. Taylorgreen me · 1997 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021 1 sentence 2021Ct. App. 1998) (the HGN test is a reliable indicator of the presence of alcohol in blood, and there is no need for trial courts to reapply a Frye analysis to HGN); Hawkins v. State, 476 S.E.2d 803, 806-08 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996) (HGN test results admissible without expert testimony regarding the scientific validity of the test; applying a Shreck-like totality of the circumstances test); State v. Gleason, 844 P.2d 691, 694-95 (Idaho 1992) (HGN testimony admissible under Frye test as evidence of impairment); State v. Taylor, 694 A.2d 907, 911-12 (Me. 1997) (applying Frye 23 test; HGN test results ad	1	1
Hawkins v. Stategreen gactapp · 1996 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021 1 sentence 2021Ct. App. 1998) (the HGN test is a reliable indicator of the presence of alcohol in blood, and there is no need for trial courts to reapply a Frye analysis to HGN); Hawkins v. State, 476 S.E.2d 803, 806-08 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996) (HGN test results admissible without expert testimony regarding the scientific validity of the test; applying a Shreck-like totality of the circumstances test); State v. Gleason, 844 P.2d 691, 694-95 (Idaho 1992) (HGN testimony admissible under Frye test as evidence of impairment); State v. Taylor, 694 A.2d 907, 911-12 (Me. 1997) (applying Frye 23 test; HGN test results ad	1	1
State v. Ruthardtgreen delsuperct · 1996 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020 1 sentence 2020Marston has never disputed the point that Colorado trial courts regularly admit such evidence. 21 aff’d on other grounds, 886 A.2d 824 (Conn. 2005); Ruthardt, 680 A.2d at 356-60 (applying Shreck-like test; HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment); Williams v. State, 710 So. 2d 24, 30-32 (Fla. Dist.	1	1
Ballard v. Stategreen alaskactapp · 1998 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020 1 sentence 2020See, e.g., Ballard v. State, 955 P.2d 931, 940 (Alaska Ct. App. 1998) (HGN evidence meets Frye test if results are offered to show a person has consumed alcohol and is potentially impaired), overruled on other grounds as recognized by Alvarez v. State, 249 P.3d 286 (Alaska 2011); State v. City Court, 799 P.2d 855, 859 (Ariz. 1990) (HGN test satisfies the Frye standard if offered only as evidence of impairment); State v. Commins, 850 A.2d 1074, 1080-81 (Conn. App. Ct. 2004) (HGN test evidence satisfied Daubert test), 4 As noted above, the prosecution cited several trial court decisions admittin	1	1
People v. Shreckgreen colo · 2001 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020 2 sentences 2020See Shreck, 22 P.3d at 76 (rejecting Frye because it “restricts the admissibility of reliable evidence that may not yet qualify as ‘generally accepted’”) (citation omitted).3 And the court emphasized that “[a]ny concerns that invalid scientific assertions will be admitted under this liberal standard are assuaged by Rule 702’s overarching mandate of reliability and relevance. . . . 2020See Shreck, 22 P.3d at 76 (rejecting Frye because it “restricts the admissibility of reliable evidence that may not yet qualify as ‘generally accepted’”) (citation omitted).3 And the court emphasized that “[a]ny concerns that invalid scientific assertions will be admitted under this liberal standard are assuaged by Rule 702’s overarching mandate of reliability and relevance. . . .	1	1
Alvarez v. Stategreen alaska · 2011 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020 1 sentence 2020See, e.g., Ballard v. State, 955 P.2d 931, 940 (Alaska Ct. App. 1998) (HGN evidence meets Frye test if results are offered to show a person has consumed alcohol and is potentially impaired), overruled on other grounds as recognized by Alvarez v. State, 249 P.3d 286 (Alaska 2011); State v. City Court, 799 P.2d 855, 859 (Ariz. 1990) (HGN test satisfies the Frye standard if offered only as evidence of impairment); State v. Commins, 850 A.2d 1074, 1080-81 (Conn. App. Ct. 2004) (HGN test evidence satisfied Daubert test), 4 As noted above, the prosecution cited several trial court decisions admittin	1	1
Brown v. Stategreen texapp · 2005 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018 2 sentences 2018Colo. 2017) (denying the defendant’s motion for a Daubert hearing on GPS data and stating that the defendant’s challenge to the accuracy of the GPS data was “a matter for cross-examination”); Brown v. State, 163 S.W.3d 818, 824 (Tex. App. 2005) (holding GPS records sufficiently reliable); see also James Beck et al., The Use of Global Position System (GPS) and Cell Tower Evidence to Establish a Person’s Location, 49 No. 1 Crim. 2018Colo. 2017) (denying the defendant’s motion for a Daubert hearing on GPS data and stating that the defendant’s challenge to the accuracy of the GPS data was “a matter for cross-examination”); Brown v. State, 163 S.W.3d 818, 824 (Tex. App. 2005) (holding GPS records sufficiently reliable); see also James Beck et al., The Use of Global Position System (GPS) and Cell Tower Evidence to Establish a Person’s Location, 49 No. 1 Crim.	1	1
cluster 1364green · · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011 2 sentences 2011Id. at 816. 2011Id. at 816.	1	1
Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichaelgreen scotus · 1999 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2001–2001 2 sentences 2001See Kumho, 526 U.S. at 151 , 119 S.Ct. 1167 (noting that, "It might not be surprising in a particular case ... that a claim made by a witness has never been the subject of peer review ...."); Heller v. Shaw Indus., Inc., 167 F.3d 146, 155 (3d Cir.1999) (holding that, given the liberal thrust of the rules of evidence and the flexible nature of the Daubert inquiry, published studies on general causation are not required for admission of a medical expert's testimony). 2001See Kumho, 526 U.S. at 151 , 119 S.Ct. 1167 (noting that, "It might not be surprising in a particular case ... that a claim made by a witness has never been the subject of peer review ...."); Heller v. Shaw Indus., Inc., 167 F.3d 146, 155 (3d Cir.1999) (holding that, given the liberal thrust of the rules of evidence and the flexible nature of the Daubert inquiry, published studies on general causation are not required for admission of a medical expert's testimony).	1	1
Carol Heller v. Shaw Industries, Inc.green ca3 · 1999 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2001–2001 2 sentences 2001See Kumho, 526 U.S. at 151 , 119 S.Ct. 1167 (noting that, "It might not be surprising in a particular case ... that a claim made by a witness has never been the subject of peer review ...."); Heller v. Shaw Indus., Inc., 167 F.3d 146, 155 (3d Cir.1999) (holding that, given the liberal thrust of the rules of evidence and the flexible nature of the Daubert inquiry, published studies on general causation are not required for admission of a medical expert's testimony). 2001See Kumho, 526 U.S. at 151 , 119 S.Ct. 1167 (noting that, "It might not be surprising in a particular case ... that a claim made by a witness has never been the subject of peer review ...."); Heller v. Shaw Indus., Inc., 167 F.3d 146, 155 (3d Cir.1999) (holding that, given the liberal thrust of the rules of evidence and the flexible nature of the Daubert inquiry, published studies on general causation are not required for admission of a medical expert's testimony).	1	1
Fishback v. Peoplegreen colo · 1993 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2001–2001 1 sentence 2001See Fishback, 851 P.2d at 896 (Mullarkey, J., concurring in the result only) (noting that, in light of the trial court's analysis under both Frye and CRE 702, "the time has come for this court to set forth clearly the standard by which novel scientific evidence should be assessed"). 7 .	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (4)

Case	Cited	Years
State v. Commins green conn · 2005 2 sentences 2021Hamilton v. City Ct., 799 P.2d 855, 859 (Ariz. 1990) (HGN test satisfies the Frye standard if offered only as evidence of impairment); State v. Commins, 850 A.2d 1074, 1080-81 (Conn. App. Ct. 2004) (HGN test evidence satisfied Daubert test), aff’d on other grounds, 886 A.2d 824 (Conn. 2005); Ruthardt, 680 A.2d at 356-60 (applying Shreck-like test; HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment); Williams v. State, 710 So. 2d 24, 30-32 (Fla. Dist. 2020Marston has never disputed the point that Colorado trial courts regularly admit such evidence. 21 aff’d on other grounds, 886 A.2d 824 (Conn. 2005); Ruthardt, 680 A.2d at 356-60 (applying Shreck-like test; HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment); Williams v. State, 710 So. 2d 24, 30-32 (Fla. Dist.	2	2020–2021
State v. Carson green mo · 1997 2 sentences 2021App. 1995) (courts may take judicial notice of the results of an HGN test); State v. Klawitter, 518 N.W.2d 577, 584-86 (Minn. 1994) (HGN test results satisfied Frye test); State v. Hill, 865 S.W.2d 702, 703-04 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993) (HGN test satisfies Frye test if offered as evidence of intoxication), overruled on other grounds by State v. Carson, 941 S.W.2d 518 (Mo. 1997); Baue, 607 N.W.2d at 201-04 (HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment under Frye test); Dahood, 814 A.2d at 166-67 (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); State v. Aleman, 194 P.3d 110, 115-16 (N.M. 2020App. 1995) (courts may take judicial notice of the results of an HGN test); State v. Klawitter, 518 N.W.2d 577, 584-86 (Minn. 1994) (HGN test results satisfied Frye test); State v. Hill, 865 S.W.2d 702, 703-04 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993) (HGN test satisfies Frye test if offered as evidence of intoxication), overruled on other grounds by State v. Carson, 941 S.W.2d 518 (Mo. 1997); Baue, 607 N.W.2d at 201 -04 22 (HGN test results admissible as evidence of impairment under Frye test); Dahood, 814 A.2d at 166-67 (HGN test results admissible under Daubert test); State v. Aleman, 194 P.3d 110, 115-16 (N.M.	2	2020–2021
Brooks v. People green colo · 1999 2 sentences 2001In Brooks, we held that it was preferable to avoid discussing "whether or to what extent a court should apply the Daubert factors," and concluded instead, that the proper focus should be on "whether the evidence is reasonably reliable information that will assist the trier of fact." Id. 2001In Brooks, we held that it was preferable to avoid discussing "whether or to what extent a court should apply the Daubert factors," and concluded instead, that the proper focus should be on "whether the evidence is reasonably reliable information that will assist the trier of fact." Id.	1	2001–2001
Lindsey v. People green colo · 1995 2 sentences 1999In Lindsey, 892 P.2d at 288 , we acknowledged the Daubert decision, but because we were construing the Colorado Rules of Evidence, we determined we were not bound by an interpretation of the federal rules as we are by constitutional analysis. 8 We did not speak to the “relative merits of the Frye test or our corollary state rules of evidence,” because the issue had not been fully briefed by the parties then before us. 1999In Lindsey, 892 P.2d at 288 , we acknowledged the Daubert decision, but because we were construing the Colorado Rules of Evidence, we determined we were not bound by an interpretation of the federal rules as we are by constitutional analysis. 8 We did not speak to the “relative merits of the Frye test or our corollary state rules of evidence,” because the issue had not been fully briefed by the parties then before us.	1	1999–1999

Where else courts name it

TX 149 (1996–2026) LA 145 (1994–2026) MS 126 (1996–2026) OH 102 (1998–2026) MI 82 (2004–2026) KY 81 (1995–2026) DE 59 (2000–2026) WI 55 (2013–2026) FL 48 (2001–2026) GA 42 (2004–2026) CT 39 (1997–2025) OK 38 (1994–2026) NE 35 (1994–2024) MD 35 (2000–2026) SD 34 (1996–2026) AZ 31 (1995–2026) NC 30 (2000–2025) NM 30 (1994–2022) AL 27 (1998–2025) MA 27 (1996–2025) KS 27 (1995–2026) NJ 24 (2000–2026) PA 24 (1997–2022) WY 23 (1999–2025) VT 23 (2000–2026) AK 23 (1999–2025) IN 21 (1995–2023) MT 20 (1994–2026) NY 18 (1997–2017) NH 18 (1994–2025) CA 18 (1995–2023) MO 18 (1995–2025) IL 17 (1998–2025) AR 17 (2003–2025) WV 14 (1995–2024) WA 13 (1994–2025) IA 12 (1997–2026) DC 10 (2011–2026) RI 9 (1999–2024) OR 6 (1996–2025) ID 6 (2002–2022) CO 6 (1999–2021) HI 6 (1997–2020) VI 6 (2001–2017) SC 6 (2000–2025) UT 5 (1996–2012) TN 5 (2002–2020) MN 5 (2000–2019) NV 3 (1998–2014) ME 2 (2003–2005) VA 2 (2004–2006) GU 2 (2021–2022)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check