NCJ Number
172080
Journal
Trial Volume: 33 Issue: 9 Dated: (September 1997) Pages: 20-27
Date Published
1997
Length
8 pages
Annotation
This article argues that state courts should avoid the "reliability" gatekeeping function assigned to them by the US Supreme Court.
Abstract
In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the US Supreme Court construed the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) as assigning a "gatekeeper" role to Federal judges. Henceforth, Federal trial judges are to screen expert scientific testimony not merely to assure that the expert is qualified, but also to assure that the expert's methodology is "reliable." This holding was a reversal of two of the Court's prior decisions that had left to juries the determination whether a qualified expert's opinion is persuasive. Daubert's assignment to trial judges of a "reliability" gatekeeping function was ill-advised. It is especially inappropriate to use a reliability threshold when experts have extensive credentials, are not full-time witnesses, and are using the same methodology they use in their "real world" jobs. Courts should stop simply with recognition that experts who consult data the Federal Government considers appropriate are entitled to state the conclusions they draw from that data. Notes