Content area

Full Text

Headnote

Abstract

The Daubert decision confirmed that the Federal Rules of Evidence are the standard for the admission of scientific evidence and expert opinion in federal courts. Criteria enumerated in Daubert are flexible and within the discretion of the trial judge, who may assign weight as he or she sees fit and may apply additional criteria. Evidence not meeting Daubert standards and criteria may not be admitted in federal courts. Several states have adopted Daubert criteria, while others have not. In addition, hundreds of decisions at all court levels have since modified, expanded, and explained Daubert. It is important for forensic engineers and others offering scientific evidence to understand Daubert and what have become known as Daubert criteria.

Key Words: Daubert, Kumho Tire, testability, error rate, peer review, general acceptance, weight vs. admissibility

Prior to the adoption of the Federal Rules of Evidence in 1975 and the Daubert decision in 1993, expert testimony was admitted in federal courts when the scientific principle on which the testimony was based was sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belonged (Waltz & Clark, 2005).

This "general acceptance" standard became the applicable federal standard after the Supreme Court decided Frye v. United States m 1923.

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticak (1993) was first filed in the Southern District Court of California in 1989. The trial judge in the Daubert case ruled that the Frye standard was the proper standard for admissibility of scientific evidence and expert testimony. Defendant Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals appealed the trial judge's ruling to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that the Federal Rules of Evidence were now the correct standard. The 9th Circuit agreed with the trial judge and affirmed the trial judge's ruling. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in 1991. In 1993 the Supreme Court handed down its ruling, vacating the 9th Circuit's decision and establishing what have become known as the Daubert criteria. The case was remanded for reconsideration consistent with the Supreme Court's ruling and the Daubert criteria. In other words, the Supreme Court said Merrell Dow was correct.

What Daubert Decided

The issue racing the Supreme Court in the Daubert appeal was whether Frye's general acceptance criteria or the Federal...

Show less