Case (cite)
Winfield v. Riley, 2021 WL 1795554 (E. D. La. 2021)
Winfield v. Riley, 2021 WL 1795554 (E. D. La. 2021)
Year
2021
State
Louisiana
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
Prosecution
Name of expert(s) who were the subject of the ruling
Byron Winbush
Summary of reasons for ruling
Winbush did not complete a photographic ballistic comparsion test on the cartridges to support his conclusion, but instead relied on his own observation, which the Defendant argues makes his conclusion less reliable. The Court finds that Winbush's testimony is sufficiently reliable to be admissible. However, the Court, to protect against overstated conclusions, limits Winbush to testifying at trial only that he matched Grims's gun and the recovered casing to the degree of "more likely than not" but not more.
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
Y
Names of prosecution expert(s) two testified at hearing
Byron Winbush
Names of defense expert(s) who testified at hearing (or None).
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
Y
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