Skip to content

State v. Clark, 196 P. 360 (Or. 1921)

Case (cite)
State v. Clark, 196 P. 360 (Or. 1921)
Year
1921
State
Oregon
Type of proceeding
Appellate
Type of claim
Evidentiary
Type of claim (second claim)
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
Sheriff Stickels
Summary of reasons for ruling
The defendant objected to the witness testifying about his experiments, the test bullets being entered into evidence, and elarged photographs taken showing the marks on the bullet recovered from the victim's gun, the defendant's gun, and the test bullets. The court held the photographs and testimony were adimissible because they helped show that, based on the markings on the bullets, the victim did not shoot himself accidentally with his own gun and that the bullet fired came from defendants gun. Further, the test bullets showed that the breechblock had no materially changed since the shooting in question.
The jurisdiction’s standard for expert admissibility at the time – list all that apply: (Frye), (Daubert), (Post-2000 Rule 702), (Other)
Second standard
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)
Discussion of 2016 PCAST report (PCAST)
Discussion of error rates / reliability
N
Frye Ruling
N
Limiting testimony ruling
Language imposed by court to limit testimony
Ruling based in prior precedent / judicial notice
N
Daubert ruling emphasizing – which factors – (list 1-5)
Ruling on qualifications of expert
N
Ruling on 702(a) – the expert will help / assist the jury
Y
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