Skip to content

Tomlin v. State, 909 So.2d 213 (Ala. Crim. App. 2002)

Case (cite)
Tomlin v. State, 909 So.2d 213 (Ala. Crim. App. 2002)
Year
2002
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:
Ballistics (and cause of death)
Defense or Prosecution Expert
Prosecution
Name of expert(s) who were the subject of the ruling
James L. Small
Summary of reasons for ruling
Defendant argued that the expert was only established as an expert in toxicology but not in any other area. Court held that challenges to qualifications of an expert go to the weight of the testimony, not its admissibility. The court said that the expert's training and experience was sufficient to qualify as an expert.
The jurisdiction’s standard for expert admissibility at the time – list all that apply: (Frye), (Daubert), (Post-2000 Rule 702), (Other)
Does not say
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