UTMT Workshop (Experts)

This rule number covers improper expert opinion testimony

Which of the following is not required under rule 702 to make an expert conclusion

• reliable application of principles and methods

• sufficient facts and data

• scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge

• method with widespread acceptance in the field.

This rule number allows experts to base their opinions on otherwise inadmissible facts and data

True/False: Experts are only allowed to use otherwise inadmissible hearsay IF it relates to their conclusion

• True

• False

This case law states that otherwise inadmissible hearsay may be admitted through an expert if it relates to "some specialized knowledge on the expert’s part"

• Richards v. Mississippi BBQ

• State v. Berzon and Jensen

• Davis v. Adams

• Kane Software Co. v. Mars Investigations

True/False: Experts conclusions must be stated in their report in order to be used in trial

• True

• False

This case law states that experts must disclose all conclusions in their report prior to trial

• Tarot Readers Association of Midlands v. Merrell Dow

• Kane Software Co. v. Mars Investigations

• Richards v. Missippi BBQ

• State v. Sutcliffe

This case law provides ways that the trail court can determine the reliability of experts' methods

• Ulrich v. Scarlet Lady Shipping

• Richards v. Mississippi BBQ

• Tarot Readers Association of Midlands v. Merrel Dow

• America's Best Cookies v. International House of Waffles

This case law limits the ability of trial courts to bar expert testimony on the basis of the Tarot Readers case law

• Kane Software Co. v. Mars Investigations

• Davis v. Adams

• Ulrich v. Scarlett Lady Shipping

• State v. Sutcliffe

This case law says that law enforcement officers are not "experts" under rule 702

• Davis v. Adams

• State v. Dawson

• State v. Richardson

• State v. Sutcliffe