Who's the Expert: Frye and Daubert in Alabama
![handle is hein.journals/cumlr47 and id is 291 raw text is:
WHO'S THE EXPERT? FRYE AND DA UBERT IN ALABAMA
ARTEM M. JOUKOV*
INTRODUCTION
In 1923, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Co-
lumbia decided Frye v. United States,] establishing a general ac-
ceptance test for scientific expert testimony.2 This general ac-
ceptance test required the methodology used by the expert to reach his
or her conclusions be generally accepted by the relevant scientific com-
munity.3 This test soon became widely adopted by many state courts,
including those in Alabama.4 However, the adoption of the Federal
Rules of Evidence resulted in a reversal of Frye at the federal level as
was demonstrated in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc.' In that
case, the Supreme Court of the United States held that Federal Rule of
Evidence 702 superseded Frye's general acceptance test.6 The Court
reasoned that the reliability and relevance principles implicit within the
liberally-construed federal rule resulted in the abolition of the Frye test
in favor of a more flexible analysis by the presiding judge.7 Thus, the
Court anointed the judge as a gatekeeper, expanding his function into
the field of weighing the validity of scientific methodology rather than
simply relying on the consensus of the relevant scientific community.8
* Assistant State Attorney, Second Judicial Circuit, Tallahassee, Florida. J.D. 2014, The
University of Alabama. The author wishes to thank Professor Steve Emens and Saman-
tha Schott for their guidance in writing this article.
I Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923).
2 Id. at 1014.
3 Id.
4 Robert J. Goodwin, Fifty Years of Frye in Alabama: The Continuing Debate over
Adopting the Test Established in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 35 CUMB.
L. REv. 231, 232 (2005).
5 Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
6 Daubert, 509 U.S. at 587; Federal Rule of Evidence 702 reads:
A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training,
or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: (a) the expert's
scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to
understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue; (b) the testimony is based
on sufficient facts or data; (c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles
and methods; and (d) the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods
to the facts of the case.
FED. R. EVID. 702 (2017).
7 Daubert, 509 U.S. at 587-90.
Id. at 597.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/cumlr47&div=23&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Who's the Expert: Frye and Daubert in Alabama
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most