Got a tricky question? Receive an answer from students like you! Try us!

Is Your State Governed by Daubert or Frye - Term Paper Example

Only on StudentShare
Undergraduate
Term Paper
Miscellaneous
Pages 5 (1255 words)

Summary

From the comparisons of fiber to psychiatric examinations and economic projections, the scope of given proficiency or expertise covers the span of the knowledge of human beings. Rarely any…

Extract of sample
Is Your State Governed by Daubert or Frye

by using experience and common sense, professional witness give conclusions on the basis of the knowledge and practices beyond the average judge’s comprehension (Suzanne, 1996). Consequently, statement by unpoliced professional witness can possibly have a biased effect on the judge, who might tend to be more inclined to believing that that the statement is exclusively based on the expert status of the witness. How can the trial jury be in a position of determining whether the professional is just speculating, or even whether the proof on which the professional is basing their statement is adequate to support the ruling? Certainly, the lay witness is prevented from speculation by the jury and can direct rulings when there is adequate evidence in support of a finding. Then is the screening of professional witness by a judge different from this practice? This is a question that poses weighty issues regarding the nature of the role of the judges. In order to be in a position of making an informed judgment concerning whether to admit a professional, the jury would appear to require at least a modicum of professionalism in the field of witness.
In Robinson, which involved a professional testimony regarding whether a DuPont fertilizer harmed the pecan trees of Robinsons, we find that the Supreme Court of Texas maintained that the Texas’ Civil Evidence Laws not only need a professional witness to be qualified, but also to offer statement that is relevant and also on the basis of a credible foundation. Nevertheless, in so doing, Robinson sufficiently adopted the standard of Daubert. The main difference in the case of Robinson was the fact that the Supreme Court of Texas had never adopted the ‘general acceptance’ standard of Frye that was particularly dismissed in Daubert, but instead had used an examination of whether the professional testimony ‘helped the fact’s trier’ under the 702 Rule. However, the Supreme Court of Texas perceived the credibility and ...
Download paper
Not exactly what you need?

Related Essays

Modern State
The concept and framework of the modern state is difficult to define because it involves a combination of historical, economic, political and cultural factors. Historical mythologies and memories are shared, traditional routes of pilgrimage have united the nations of the continent in common religious bonds throughout history, and now they all share the same market (Morphet 517). It is possible to single out the following distinctive features of the modern state: high level of nationalism and multiculturalism, liberal institutions and importance of national culture, integrity and cooperation on…
4 pages (1004 words)
state capitalism
For some, it is very improbable that this period has adequate technical merit. There is no short and so straightforward delineation of the notion is usually acknowledged, for the straightforward cause that communal idea in general, in a sense, this is a try to work out the source, environment and destiny of capitalism (Bremmer 240). Therefore, what should of necessity highly selective representation. Its aim is directed at some centered issue of outlook on capitalism as humanity, as annals and as a presence.…
10 pages (2510 words)