NCJ Number
84877
Journal
Iowa Law Review Volume: 67 Issue: 5 Dated: (July 1982) Pages: 879-916
Date Published
1982
Length
38 pages
Annotation
The general relevancy and expert testimony rules of evidence furnish a simple, unified framework for admissibility decisions on scientific evidence that is applicable to other kinds of evidence.
Abstract
Considerable controversy and some confusion exist concerning the standard that should be used by courts in assessing the admissibility of scientific evidence. The scientific evidence admissibility decision can best be accommodated within the procedural framework of traditional relevancy and expert testimony analysis. To the extent the objectives of other alternatives have merit, those objectives are attainable under regular relevancy and expert testimony rules exemplified in rules 401, 403, and 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The evolution of the once-dominant 'general scientific acceptance standard' shows that little difference now exists between that special rule and the ordinary rules. Four principal benefits derive from the use of traditional admissibility rules. First, judicial attention focuses on concepts judges are trained to use. Second, the admissibility decision can be readily adapted to the characteristics of the evidence and the circumstances in which it is offered. Third, the traditional inquiry sharpens analysis without the distractions and collateral issues that can arise with special rules. Fourth, the single approach for all evidentiary issues fosters procedural simplicity and uniformity. A total of 237 footnotes is provided. (Author summary modified)