Skip to content

People v. Pritchett, 2017 WL 1422830 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017)

Case (cite)
People v. Pritchett, 2017 WL 1422830 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017)
Year
2017
State
Michigan
Type of proceeding
Appellate
Type of claim
Evidentiary; Due Process
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
Prosecution
Name of expert(s) who were the subject of the ruling
Gary Latham
Summary of reasons for ruling
[qualification] (challenged on another, non-firearms-related issue); [reliability] because the court has previously recognized the admissibility of ballistics expert's testimony in the past, here it declined to overrule the conclusion.
The jurisdiction’s standard for expert admissibility at the time – list all that apply: (Frye), (Daubert), (Post-2000 Rule 702), (Other)
MRE 702
Did lower court hold a hearing
N/A
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
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
Y
Daubert ruling emphasizing – which factors – (list 1-5)
N/A
Ruling on qualifications of expert
N (qualification ruling was for a different expert in non-ballistics area)
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
Y
Ruling on 702(c) – the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods
Y
Ruling on 702(d) – reliable application of principles and methods to the facts of the case
Y

Notes