Case (cite)
State v. Magee, 243 So.3d 151 (Ct. App. La. 2018)
State v. Magee, 243 So.3d 151 (Ct. App. La. 2018)
Year
2018
State
Louisiana
Type of proceeding
Appellate
Type of claim
Due Process
Type of claim (second claim)
Expert evidence ruling reversing or affirming on appeal:
Admitted
What was the ruling?
No Error due to Harmless Error
Type of evidence at issue:
Firearms identification
Defense or Prosecution Expert
Prosecution
Name of expert(s) who were the subject of the ruling
Watson
Summary of reasons for ruling
Defendant argues that the trial court's preventing him from cross examining the expert about the NAS2009 report denied his right to present a defense. The court disagrees and explains that firearms identification testimony has been long accepted in Louisiana, and that although he could not ask about the NAS2009 report, he had the opportunity to cross examine the witness.
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
Y
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)
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
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