Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- File Type
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Choice And Boundary Problems In Logerquist, Hummert, And Kumho Tire, David H. Kaye
Choice And Boundary Problems In Logerquist, Hummert, And Kumho Tire, David H. Kaye
David Kaye
This article, part of a symposium on the opinion of the Arizona Supreme Court in Logerquist v. McVey, questions that court’s rationales for refusing to apply heightened scrutiny to psychiatric testimony about the retrieval of repressed memories. It also challenges the court’s use of a “personal observations” exception to the heightened scrutiny standard of Frye v. United States. It proposes that a better solution to problems of scientific and expert evidence would be to adopt a sliding scale that attends to the use to which the evidence is put and the degree to which it has been shown to be …
Empiricism In Daubert And The California Supreme Court In Sargon, Robert Sanger
Empiricism In Daubert And The California Supreme Court In Sargon, Robert Sanger
Robert M. Sanger
California has become a Daubert state. In Sargon v. The University of Southern California, the California Supreme Court held that judges are the “gatekeepers” with regard to expert or scientific evidence in this state, just as has been the case in the federal system (and many other states) since the decision in Daubert. Now that California is avowedly a Daubert state, it is important to understand why courtroom evidence – scientific, expert or, for that matter, otherwise – is properly grounded in empiricism. Empiricism is the theory that knowledge is derived from experience. Understanding this empirical basis for both Daubert …