Skip to content

Pynes v. State, 92 So. 663 (Ala. 1922)

Case (cite)
Pynes v. State, 92 So. 663 (Ala. 1922)
Year
1922
State
Alabama
Type of proceeding
Appellate
Type of claim
Evidentiary
Expert evidence ruling reversing or affirming on appeal:
Admitted
What was the ruling?
Correct to Admit
Type of evidence at issue:
Firearms
Defense or Prosecution Expert
Prosecution
Name of expert(s) who were the subject of the ruling
May
Summary of reasons for ruling
Expert testified that the pistol he examine had not been fired recently. Defendant objected that the expert was not qualified as an expert. The expert testified that he "was familiar" with revolvers and "that he had used pistols and shells a good deal." The court held that "[a] witness may have expert knowledge of some of the more ordinary affairs of life . . . and our opinion is that this witness was qualified to testify as he did."
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
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

The entirety of the discussion on the expert witness is pasted into the summary. Not much reasoning behind why the expert was qualified as an expert.