Skip to content

State v. Shawley, 67 S.W.2d 74 (Missouri 1933)

Case (cite)
State v. Shawley, 67 S.W.2d 74 (Missouri 1933)
Type of proceeding
Type of claim
Type of claim (second claim)
Expert evidence ruling reversing or affirming on appeal:
What was the ruling?
Correct to Admit
Type of evidence at issue:
Firearms identification
Defense or Prosecution Expert
Name of expert(s) who were the subject of the ruling
Seth Waird
Summary of reasons for ruling
"[W]e might, perhaps, be inclined to give consideration to this assignment if defendant had made a general objection below assailing the witness in his character as an expert or questioning the probative value of ballistics evidence. But the defendant did not do that. The testimony of the witness covers forty–six pages of the transcript. It is interspersed with numerous objections to particular questions on particular grounds, but we find no general objection except that the evidence bullet, concerning which the witness was testifying, had not been properly identified, and we have already ruled that objection was properly overruled. However, we will say that, while the question is a new one in this state, we are satisfied the rights of the defendant were not prejudiced by the admission of the ballistics testimony. It has been held competent in a number of other jurisdictions when given by a qualified expert."
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
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
Frye Ruling
Limiting testimony ruling
Language imposed by court to limit testimony
Ruling based in prior precedent / judicial notice
Daubert ruling emphasizing – which factors – (list 1-5)
Ruling on qualifications of expert
Ruling on 702(a) – the expert will help / assist the jury
Ruling on 702(b) – the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data
Ruling on 702(c) – the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods
Ruling on 702(d) – reliable application of principles and methods to the facts of the case