Skip to content

Matthews v. People, 3 Pac. (2d) 409 (Colorado 1931)

Case (cite)
Matthews v. People, 3 Pac. (2d) 409 (Colorado 1931)
Year
1931
State
Colorado
Type of proceeding
Appellate
Type of claim
Evidentiary
Expert evidence ruling reversing or affirming on appeal:
Admitted
What was the ruling?
Error to Admit; Remand
Type of evidence at issue:
Firearms identification
Defense or Prosecution Expert
Prosecution
Name of expert(s) who were the subject of the ruling
N/A
Summary of reasons for ruling
Defendant was convicted of the murder of his wife and sentenced to the penitentiary for life. Aside from mere routine proof, the State's case rested solely upon the testimony of a ballistics expert, who had examined the bullets taken from the body of the deceased, compared them with bullets which he fired from defendant's revolver, and gave it as his opinion that the murder was committed with that weapon. On review, the court reversed and remanded with directions to sustain motion for directed verdict. The sole evidence of guilt was the assertion that certain alleged markings appeared upon the bullets. The court examined them and found nothing of the kind. The thread was entirely too slender to support a sentence of life imprisonment. The evidence was not only weak and uncertain, but was no evidence. Under such circumstances, defendant's motion for a directed verdict should have been sustained
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
N/A
Names of defense expert(s) who testified at hearing (or None).
N/A
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/
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