![]() ![]() In other words, both tests require courts to exclude junk science Daubert simply allows courts to consider more than just ‘general acceptance’ in determining whether expert testimony must be excluded.” Regardless of which test the court applies, the court may admit evidence only once it ensures, pursuant to MRE 702, that expert testimony meets that rule’s standard of reliability. “he court’s gatekeeper role is the same under Davis-Frye and Daubert. It has not altered the court’s fundamental duty of ensuring that all expert opinion testimony-regardless of whether the testimony is based on ‘novel’ science-is reliable. But this modification of MRE 702 changes only the factors that a court may consider in determining whether expert opinion evidence is admissible. been amended explicitly to incorporate Daubert’s standards of reliability. See Gilbert v DaimlerChrysler Corp, 470 Mich 749, 781-782 (2004), which states: Effective January 1, 2004, Michigan adopted the Daubert test by amending MRE 702. To effectuate its gatekeeper role, a court must focus its inquiry “solely on principles and methodology, not the conclusions that they generate.” Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharm, Inc, 509 US 579, 595 (1993). “To require some form of certification in a specific subfield of a larger profession in order to serve as an expert witness would cause not only absurd results, but mandate the creation of new certifications any time a novel or rare issue were before a trial court.” People v Brown, 326 Mich App 185, 196-197 (2019) (a certified nurse who had not yet received her sexual assault nurse examiner certification was still considered competent as a medical professional). ![]() or that a medical expert have devoted a majority of his or her practice to a given specialty to be qualified to offer expert testimony.” People v McKewen, 326 Mich App 342, 350 (2018) (holding the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that a board-certified cardiothoracic and general trauma surgeon who treated the victim was qualified to testify that the victim had been stabbed by a knife despite defendant’s objection that the witness was not qualified “because he did not possess the same qualifications as, for example, a medical examiner”). nothing in MRE 702 requires that a medical expert be board certified in a particular specialty. “If the court determines that scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise if (1) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.” MRE 702. Chapter 4: Expert Witnesses and Scientific Evidence
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |