to get emails from people updating my information. States in the third category, like NorthCarolina, express a variety of standards, but generally use a balancing test approach,balancing relevancy or materiality with prejudicial effect which, in North Carolina, hasbeen noted as "consistent with
State v. Goode
, 341 N.C. 513, 461 S.E.2d 631(1995)).THE REASONING BEHIND
JUDICIAL NOTICE: The theoretical foundations behind many sciences are so firmlyestablished as scientific laws that they are more properly the subject of judicial notice; the judge should be able to make a determination.ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Some techniques and procedures have such an extensiveprecedent in administrative law as to be part of official manual/standard operatingprocedure for agencies; it is wide-ranging precedent.CERTIFICATION: Scientific fields that have been generally accepted by professionalforensic associations are proliferating, forensic this and forensic that; there must be someunderlying reliability standards.CODIFICATION:
may provide the impetus to amend Fed. Rule 702 and itsstate counterparts which have created a variety of tests such as the "modified Frye Rule",the "Frye Plus Rule", the "objectively verifiable rule", and "three-prong rules".
Let's look at some common statements of FRYE and DAUBERT:
Interpretation of Frye:
Interpretation of Daubert:
Where novel scientific evidence is at issue,the Frye inquiry allows the judiciary to deferto scientific expertise precisely as to whetheror not it has gained "general acceptance" inthe relevant field. The trial court'sgatekeeper role in this respect isconservative, thus helping to keep"pseudoscience" out of the courtroom.General acceptance is an austere standardabsent from and incompatible with the Rulesof Evidence. "Scientific knowledge" must bederived from the scientific method supportedby "good grounds"
in validating the expert'stestimony, establishing a standard of "evidentiary reliability."
ruling substitutes a reliability test for a relevancy test.
For statesthat follow neither
, this means that the continued practice of usingreliability as a weight once relevancy has been established exposes a serious constitutionalliability.WHAT ARE THE RELIABILITY FACTORS IN
?All trial courts make a preliminary determination of admissibility. This job involves apreliminary assessment of whether the evidence is relevant, competent, and material. Inshort, can the evidence be properly applied to the facts in this case? This is the traditional"gatekeeping" function of courts. A number of reliability factors can enter into this andsubsequent hearings using the
Has the scientific theory or technique been empirically tested? According toK. Popper (1989) in
The Growth of Scientific Knowledge
, "the criterion on thescientific status of a theory is its falsifiability, refutability, and testability."