Tuesday, December 27, 2005

Latent Print Identification Scores Partial Success with Massachusetts Supreme Court

From Bob Ambrogi, we learn of the Massachusetts Supreme Court's decision in Commonwealth v. Patterson, No. SJC-09478 (Mass. Dec. 27, 2005), upholding the admissibility of evidence on latent fingerprint identification on "general acceptance" grounds, but rejecting, on the record before it, the admissibility of identifications based on "simultaneous impressions." The latter technique involves piecing together an identification from multiple latent prints, no one of which is complete enough to support a match by itself.

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.