1. In Alabama, firearms identification testimonies are generally admissble. (“In Alabama, a properly qualified expert should be permitted to testify whether or not a particular shell was fired from a specific firearm based upon his comparison of the distinctive marks on the shell with the physical features of the firearm.”) 2. Firearms identification testimy is not a type of scientific evidence. 3. Therefore, it is not governed by Daubert or Frye. 4. It is admissable if it satisfies the requirements of Rule 702: (1) the witness is qualified as an expert in the field and (2) the testimony assisted the jury in determing a fact in issue. 5. In other words, the threshold for the admissbility of firearm identification testimony is pretty low in Alabama.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
6. By statute, Daubert only applies to DNA evidence. 7. Frye only applies to scientific evidence. 8. If [a forensic technique] involves “subjective observation and comparisons based on the expert’s training, skills, or experience . . . it does not constitute scientific evidence.”<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n