In People v Kowalski, __ Mich
MRE 702 establishes prerequisites for the admission of expert witness testimony. Gilbert v DaimlerChrysler Corp, 470 Mich 749, 782, 789 (2004): If the court determines that scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise if (1) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.
A court thereby evaluating proposed expert testimony must ensure that the testimony (1) will assist the trier of fact to understand a fact in issue, (2) is provided by an expert qualified in the relevant field of knowledge, and (3) is based on reliable data, principles, and methodologies that are applied reliably to the facts of the case. An expert who lacks ‘knowledge’ in the field at issue cannot ‘assist the trier of fact. Likewise, expert testimony without a credible foundation of scientific data, principles, and methodologies is unreliable and, thus, unhelpful to the trier of fact.
First, the trial court must determine whether the proposed expert testimony will “assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue”—If the proffered testimony is not relevant or does not involve a matter that is beyond the common understanding of the average juror, the same is not allowable as opinion testimony. If answered in the affirmative, the court must then consider the other requirements of MRE 702 before determining whether to exclude the proposed testimony. Second, the proposed testimony is admissible under MRE 702 if it meets the other requirements of the evidentiary rule: the “witness [is] qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education,” the “testimony is based on sufficient facts or data,” the “testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods,” and the “witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.” When evaluating the reliability of a scientific theory or technique, courts should consider certain factors, including but not limited to whether the theory has been or can be tested, whether it has been published and peer-reviewed, its level of general acceptance, and its rate of error if known. This analysis requires courts to ensure that “each aspect of an expert witness’s proffered testimony—including the data underlying the expert’s theories and the methodology by which the expert draws conclusions from that data—is reliable.”
No comments:
Post a Comment