ONCALL
...Evidence
......Opinion & Scientific Evidence
17 Cards On This Topic:
  • Upon plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, trial ct. properly excluded declaration of defendant's expert where it lacked adequate foundation and analysis, and made legal conclusions.
  • Under Sanchez, an expert witness may not relate as true the case-specific content of documents which were neither admitted into evidence nor shown to be covered by a hearsay exception.
  • Under Sanchez, psychiatric expert could testify to case-specific facts in psychiatric patient's records that were ruled admissible under the business records exception of the hearsay rule.
  • Sanchez precluded expert from relating case-specific hearsay facts about V's mental condition and aggressive behavior in hypothetical form.
  • Expert’s testimony that he relied on a database to determine the contents of the pills found on defendant’s person was not case-specific hearsay.
  • The hearsay rule of Sanchez applies only prospectively and is not retroactive.
  • Under Sanchez, expert could relate case-specific hearsay to the jury so long as it was subject to an exception; any error in relating inadmissible hearsay was harmless.
  • Expert testimony regarding fingerprints is not subject to a Kelly-Frye inquiry.
  • Trial ct. correctly allowed eyewitness identification expert to generally opine on factors that may effect eyewitness identification and correctly excluded testimony as to discrepancies in a specific witness' identification.
  • Gang enhancement reversed where evidence of defendant's gang membership was based entirely on expert testimony inadmissible under Sanchez.
  • If the terms used by an expert witness do not have a specialized legal meaning and are not an attempt to instruct the jury on the law, or how to apply it to case facts, the expert's testimony is not an impermissible legal conclusion.
  • Expert witnesses reading case-specific facts from ancient documents into evidence does not run afoul of Sanchez.
  • Sanchez error where prosecution on cross-examination asked defendant's expert witness to treat case-specific testimonial hearsay in police and sheriff's reports as true.
  • Sanchez does not change Evid. Code §801 (b): An expert may still rely on hearsay in forming an opinion, and may tell the jury in general terms that he did so.
  • Expert testimony that traffic accident victim was driving while marijuana impaired properly excluded where evidence was speculative.
  • Under Sanchez, case-specific evidence considered by an expert must be properly admitted through an applicable hearsay exception or through an appropriate witness.
  • Results of Abel test properly excluded from guilt phase of D's trial for child molestation.