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.