Case (cite)
U.S. v. Chavez, 2021 WL 5882466 (N. D. Cal. 2021)
U.S. v. Chavez, 2021 WL 5882466 (N. D. Cal. 2021)
Year
2021
State
California
Type of proceeding
Trial
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
Both
Name of expert(s) who were the subject of the ruling
N/A
Summary of reasons for ruling
Defendant motioned to limit the presentation of ballistics comparison evidence by the government. So, the Court analyzed in turn whether each Daubert factor weighs in favor of reliability. The Court ultimately concluded that even in light of a minority of cases, decided after the Ninth Circuit Johnson decision¸ AFTE methodology is relevant and reliable and that no limiting instruction is necessary. Defendants may cross-examine the governments' experts and present their own ballistic experts.
The jurisdiction’s standard for expert admissibility at the time – list all that apply: (Frye), (Daubert), (Post-2000 Rule 702), (Other)
Daubert
Second standard
FRE 702
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)
NAS2009
Discussion of 2016 PCAST report (PCAST)
PCAST
Discussion of error rates / reliability
Y
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)
All factors
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