NCJ Number
17727
Journal
University of Florida Law Review Volume: 25 Issue: 3 Dated: (SPRING 1973) Pages: 608-613
Date Published
1973
Length
6 pages
Annotation
IN THIS CASE, THE COURT HELD THAT VOICEPRINTS WERE PROPERLY ADMITTED TO CORROBORATE A DEFENDANT'S IDENTIFICATION WHERE SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE WAS AVAILABLE TO SUSTAIN HIS CONVICTION WITHOUT THE USE OF VOICEPRINTS.
Abstract
THIS CASE COMMENT EXAMINES THE COURTS' DETERMINATION OF ADMISSIBILITY OF VOICEPRINTS AS EVIDENCE, AS WELL AS THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE QUALIFICATIONS OF EXPERTS WHO ARE TO RENDER OPINIONS ON THE RESULTS OF APPLICATIONS OF SCIENTIFIC DEVICES OR TECHNIQUES THAT HAVE BEEN JUDICIALLY ACCEPTED. JUDICIAL DECISIONS REGARDING THE ADMISSIBILITY OF VOICEPRINT EVIDENCE BASED ON THE 'GENERAL SCIENTIFIC ACCEPTANCE' TEST OF ITS RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY ARE CITED. THE AUTHOR POINTS OUT THAT THE COURT IN WORLEY LEFT UNANSWERED THE QUESTION OF WHAT STANDARDS OF RELIABILITY IT FOLLOWED OR WHAT FACTORS WERE DETERMINATIVE OF ADMISSIBILITY. HE ARGUES THAT A MORE SATISFACTORY TEST THAN 'GENERAL ACCEPTANCE' IS NEEDED FOR DETERMINING THE ADMISSIBILITY OF SCIENTIFIC PROOF IN ORDER TO PROVIDE STANDARDS FOR THE APPLICATION OF JUDICIAL DISCRETION IN DETERMINING EVIDENCE RELIABILITY. DISSENTING OPINIONS ON THE RELIABILITY OF VOICEPRINT IDENTIFICATION - THE FACT THAT IT IS UNCERTAIN THAT NO TWO VOICES ARE IDENTICAL AND THAT THE PROCESS CANNOT BE DEFEATED BY VOICE DISGUISE - ARE ALSO DISCUSSED. THE AUTHOR SUGGESTS, THAT UNTIL FURTHER STUDIES OF THE RELIABILITY OF VOICEPRINT IDENTIFICATION ARE MADE, VOICEPRINT EVIDENCE BE LIMITED TO USE FOR CORROBORATIVE PURPOSES.