Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Forensic evidence

Robert M. Sanger

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

The New Pcast Report To The President Of The United States On Forensic Science, Robert M. Sanger Oct 2016

The New Pcast Report To The President Of The United States On Forensic Science, Robert M. Sanger

Robert M. Sanger

The President of the United States requested an in-depth report from the President’s Council of Advisors
on Science and Technology (known as PCAST) in 2015 to “consider whether there are additional steps that
could usefully be taken on the scientific side to strengthen the forensic science disciplines and ensure the validity of forensic evidence used in the Nation’s legal system.” The PCAST Report was issued September 20, 2016, specifically referring to criminal court applications of forensic science. The report has implications for civil
litigators as well as criminal. It also has implications for judges, particularly those at the trial level. …

Go to article

The New Rules For Admissibility Of Expert Testimony: Part Ii, Robert Sanger Oct 2013

The New Rules For Admissibility Of Expert Testimony: Part Ii, Robert Sanger

Robert M. Sanger

As described in the last Criminal Justice column for the Santa Barbara Lawyer magazine, the California Supreme Court’s opinion in Sargon Enterprises v. University of Southern California, 55 Cal. 4th 747, 149 Cal. Rptr. 3d 614 (2012) made it clear that California is now, (and perhaps unsuspectingly has been for some time), a Daubert jurisdiction. This requires the trial court be the “gatekeeper” and make a determination as to the admissibility of scientific or expert testimony and to determine the limits of any testimony, if it is introduced. The Court held that there are essentially three criteria: The first criterion …

Go to article

The New Rules For Admissibility Of Expert Testimony: Part I, Robert Sanger Sep 2013

The New Rules For Admissibility Of Expert Testimony: Part I, Robert Sanger

Robert M. Sanger

In a previous series of articles for this magazine, I took the position that California really was a Daubert jurisdiction in the sense that Kelly and Frye and thenexisting case law required that the court be the “gatekeeper” and make a determination as to: 1) whether a science (or area of expertise) was a science (or area of expertise); 2) whether the witness was a scientist (or expert); 3) whether the data was reliable; and then, and only then, 4) what a true scientist (or expert) could say based on the science and based on the reliable data. In the …

Go to article