Skip to content

Kendrick v. Parris, 989 F.3d 459 (6th Cir. 2021)

Case (cite)
Kendrick v. Parris, 989 F.3d 459 (6th Cir. 2021)
Year
2021
State
Tennessee
Type of proceeding
Appellate
Type of claim
Evidentiary; Ineffective assistance of counsel
Expert evidence ruling reversing or affirming on appeal:
Admitted
What was the ruling?
Correct to Admit
Type of evidence at issue:
Firearms identification
Defense or Prosecution Expert
Both
Name of expert(s) who were the subject of the ruling
Kelly Fite
Summary of reasons for ruling
A fairminded jurist could agree with the Tennessee Supreme Court that counsel's pre-trial strategy for rebutting the State's firearms expert was reasonable because there was ample room for reasonable disagreement as to the need to hire an expert in the case.
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
N/A
Names of prosecution expert(s) two testified at hearing
Kelly Fite
Names of defense expert(s) who testified at hearing (or None).
Henry Jackson Belk, Jr.
Discussion of 2009 NAS Report (NAS2009) or PCAST report (PCAST)
N
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
N
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

This case is less about the admissibility of firearms expert testimony as it is whether or not counsel’s decision not to adduce the testimony of a firearms expert is constitutionally deficient performance (Court holds it is not).