Thursday, March 03, 2005

2d Circuit Upholds Evidence from Detective Testifying as Both Fact Witness and Expert

In the past, the Second Circuit has cautioned of the risks involved when a law enforcement officer wears two evidentiary hats, offering both fact and expert testimony. It now appears, however, that there is no per se rule in the Second Circuit barring the practice. Yesterday, the court upheld testimony from a detective who testified in both capacities. From the opinion:

Her expert testimony was brief and related only to a few general practices of street-level drug dealers, none of which was in dispute in this case. Her testimony as to facts pertinent to this particular case was also brief and, more to the point, sufficiently separate and distinct from her expert testimony to raise no concern that the line between the two would be "hard to discern."
See United States v. Barrow, No. 03-1074 (2d Cir. Mar. 2, 2005) (Sack, Raggi, & Hall, JJ.).

posted by pn at 11:58 AM  

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

Fed. R. Evid. 702: If 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 upon 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.