Skip to content

Bowden v. State, 610 So.2d 1256 (Ala. Crim. App. 1992)

Case (cite)
Bowden v. State, 610 So.2d 1256 (Ala. Crim. App. 1992)
Year
1992
State
Alabama
Type of proceeding
Appellate
Type of claim
Evidentiary
Expert evidence ruling reversing or affirming on appeal:
Excluded
What was the ruling?
Correct to Exclude
Type of evidence at issue:
Firearms identification
Defense or Prosecution Expert
Defense
Name of expert(s) who were the subject of the ruling
Douglas Harbin
Summary of reasons for ruling
The court held "[i]t is error for a court to allow an expert witness to testify outside his area of expertise." Expert was a firearms repair expert, not a firearms identification expert. Expert did not have "proficiency, training, or experience in shotgun shell identification and in determining whether a particular shell had been fired from a particular weapon." Expert had never compared shells of unknown origin with a specific weapon.
The jurisdiction’s standard for expert admissibility at the time – list all that apply: (Frye), (Daubert), (Post-2000 Rule 702), (Other)
N/A
Did lower court hold a hearing
Y
Names of prosecution expert(s) two testified at hearing
Names of defense expert(s) who testified at hearing (or None).
Discussion of 2009 NAS Report (NAS2009) or PCAST report (PCAST)
N/A
Discussion of error rates / reliability
N
Frye Ruling
N
Limiting testimony ruling
N
Language imposed by court to limit testimony
N/A
Ruling based in prior precedent / judicial notice
N
Daubert ruling emphasizing – which factors – (list 1-5)
N/A
Ruling on qualifications of expert
Y
Ruling on 702(a) – the expert will help / assist the jury
N
Ruling on 702(b) – the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data
N
Ruling on 702(c) – the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods
N
Ruling on 702(d) – reliable application of principles and methods to the facts of the case
N

Notes