About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

7 Drexel L. Rev. 239 (2014-2015)
Jury Evaluation of Expert Testimony under the Federal Rules

handle is hein.journals/drexel7 and id is 251 raw text is: JURY EVALUATION OF EXPERT TESTIMONY UNDER THE FEDERAL RULES Hon. Mark I. Bernstein* ABSTRACT The purpose of expert testimony is to communicate to this body of ordi- nary persons the wisdom and understanding necessary for the triers to ex- ercise sound judgment in determining the issues in controversy .... [Tihe examination should be conducted in such manner that a juror should be able to say, 'My conclusion is in accord with the opinion of the expert, not because he has expressed the opinion, but because he made me understand the facts in such a way that my opinion is the same as his.1 - Mason Ladd [T]he prosecutor could . . . substitute experts for all kinds of people making out-of-court statements .... [T]he State could sneak it in through the back. What a neat trick- but really, what a way to run a criminal jus- tice system. No wonder five Justices reject it.2 - Justice Kagan TABLE OF CONTENTS IN TRODU CTIO N ............................................................................... 240 A . The Problem .................................................................... 241 B. The Oath-Takers; Compurgation .................................... 244 C . C hanges ........................................................................... 245 I. THE PREREQUISITE FOR THE ADMISSION OF ANY EVIDENCE: DIRECT KNOWLEDGE OR AUTHENTICATION ........................... 246 II. THE BATTLE ABOUT EXPERTS: THE CREDIBILITY OF PROPERLY * Mark I. Bernstein is a sitting Judge of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia Coun- ty. He teaches Advanced Evidence at the Thomas R. Kline School of Law. The author would like to thank the many law students who participated in the research necessary for this article including Scott Florida, Abbie Heller, Eric Bodzin, and John Mercogliano. The author especial- ly thanks Tudor Farcas without whose tremendous research abilities this article would never have been completed. The author would also like to thank Gwen Stem, Mark Bookman, Judge Daniel J. Anders, and his wife, Linda Bernstein, for their substantive suggestions and support. 1. Mason Ladd, Expert Testimony, 5 VAND. L. REV. 414, 428 (1952). Mason Ladd served as dean of the Iowa College of Law from 1939 to 1966 and is best known for his scholarship on evidence. See generally Ronald L. Carlson, Mason Ladd -In Memoriam, 66 IOWA L. REV. 685 (1981). 2. Williams v. Illinois, 132 S. Ct. 2221, 2272 (2012) (Kagan, J., dissenting). 239

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most