9th Circuit Reverses Exclusion of Medical Testimony in Support of Entrapment Defense

Yesterday, the Ninth Circuit published an opinion reversing the trial court's exclusion of medical testimony in a drug conspiracy trial. The defendant relied on an entrapment defense, proffering two experts to opine that he suffered from brain damage rendering him especially susceptible to the entrappers' inducements. The district court excluded the testimony as unreliable and prejudicial. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for a new trial. The admissibility of medical expert testimony, the appellate panel said, should be determined not by reference to a rigid standard of conclusive certainty, but rather according to whether "physicians would accept it as useful and reliable." As for the district court's finding that the testimony would confuse the issues, the panel responded that "predisposition was the issue." See United States v. Sandoval-Mendoza, No. 04-10118 (9th Cir. Dec. 27, 2006) (Goodwin, O'Scannlain, & Kleinfeld, JJ.).