State v. Benton, 413 A.2d 104 (R.I. 1980)

Defendant argues that the trial court erred in admitting certain opinion testimony by the state's ballistics expert because (1) it was error to permit him to state an opinion about the conclusiveness of his test, and (2) his testimony about the conclusiveness of his test was irrelevant, since the probative value of the testimony does not depend upon the view that the individual witness takes of his own performance, skills or expertise. The court affirms thr trial court's ruling, as the trial court exercises wide discretion in determining the admissibility of an expert's opinion testimony. Although made in the context of his own ballistics test, the expert expressed the degree of credibility that experts in general attribute to the method he used, not his view of his own performance, skills or epertise. This testimony was therefore probative of a material issue.