CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...
Opinion & Scientific Evidence
......
Expert Testimony: Qualifications
.........
Experts Found Qualified-Examples
............Medical - Criminal Context
9 Cards On This Topic:
Well-qualified pathologist's testimony that 11-yr.-old V died by drowning in association with sexual assault was reliable and properly admitted.
No abuse of discretion to allow expert to testify his testing showed bullets could have been fired from a gun of which barrel found on D's parents' property was a part but could not say for sure nor quantify probabilities.
Question of whether V was raped and sodomized prior to or after dying is a relevant circumstance of death for which a qualified forensic pathologist might offer an opinion.
No error to admit clinical toxicologist’s medical opinion and pathologist’s evidence re V’s paraquat poisoning although he hadn’t autopsied similar poison V before.
Experienced criminalist fully qualified to render expert opinion on blood spatter patterns whether he personally investigated crime scene or not.
Expert testimony on effect of alcohol on intent properly admitted despite marginal qualification; unless "clearly unqualified," goes to weight of testimony.
Despite homicide investigator's lack of scientific training, his testimony was sufficiently reliable to justify admitting pathologists' opinions on V's nicotine poisoning into evidence.
Testimony of court drug program coordinator who conducted D's urine test (E) was not inadmissible hearsay even had D not waived issue by failure to object at trial.
Investigator found competent to express opinion based on own experience as to whether equipment found in D's residence was associated with practice of medicine.