Skip to content

People v. Westlake, 62 Cal. 303

Case (cite)
People v. Westlake, 62 Cal. 303
Year
1882
State
California
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:
Ballistics
Defense or Prosecution Expert
Defense
Name of expert(s) who were the subject of the ruling
Does not name
Summary of reasons for ruling
Whether the wound of which the witness died could have been inflicted by a pistol-shot fired by the defendant from a certain direction, was a fact to be found by the jury from the evidence of the circumstances under which the homicide was committed, or by inference, from the relative position of the parties at the time the shot was fired. It was not such a matter of science or skill as required the opinion of an expert.
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
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/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