Evidence Law: Opinion Testimony of Laypeople and Experts

LawShelf
22 Apr 202009:14
EducationalLearning
32 Likes 10 Comments

TLDRThis video explains the principles and rules surrounding opinion testimony in judicial hearings and trials. It highlights the differences between lay witness opinions and expert witness opinions. Lay witness opinions must be based on personal perceptions and common knowledge, while expert witness opinions are based on specialized knowledge and require formal recognition by the court. The video also discusses the admissibility of such testimonies and the importance of supporting opinions with adequate foundations. Overall, it emphasizes the careful consideration courts must give to the reliability and necessity of opinion testimony.

Takeaways
  • 🚫 Opinion testimony is generally disfavored in judicial hearings or trials, as the preference is for witnesses to state facts and let the jury or judge draw conclusions.
  • 🗨️ Opinion testimony can be admissible if there is a good policy reason for it, such as when it is necessary, helpful, and not based on specialized knowledge.
  • 👁️ Lay witness opinion testimony must be rationally based on the witness's perception, helpful for understanding the testimony or determining a fact at issue, and not based on specialized knowledge.
  • 🚦 An example of acceptable lay opinion is a witness estimating the speed of a vehicle based on their observation, which is within the scope of everyday experience.
  • 🚫 Lay witnesses should not offer opinions that require specialized knowledge or that could be prejudicial, such as determining if a driver was intoxicated.
  • 🎓 Expert witnesses are given more latitude in expressing opinions and must be formally recognized by the court as having relevant expertise.
  • 📚 Expert witnesses must demonstrate knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education in their area of expertise to be accepted by the court.
  • 🔍 Expert opinions must be based on sufficient facts or data, reliable principles and methods, and the expert must have applied these reliably to the facts.
  • 🔗 Expert witnesses do not need to personally perceive the facts of the case; their opinions can be formed from a combination of case details and their field knowledge.
  • 🚷 Unlike lay opinions, expert opinions are not limited to everyday experiences and can encompass specialized knowledge and complex analysis.
  • ⚖️ The court has the discretion to exclude opinions that are not reliable or from witnesses who are not qualified, ensuring that opinions presented are valid and helpful.
Q & A

  • Why is opinion testimony generally disfavored in judicial hearings or trials?

    -Opinion testimony is generally disfavored because the preference is for witnesses to tell the judge or jury what they know and let them draw conclusions. This is to ensure that the court's decision is based on factual evidence rather than subjective interpretations.

  • Under what circumstances is opinion testimony admissible in court?

    -Opinion testimony can be admissible when there is a good policy reason to allow it, such as when it is necessary, helpful, and within the scope of the witness's expertise or common experiences.

  • What are the three requirements for lay witness opinion testimony to be admissible?

    -Lay witness opinion testimony must be rationally based on the witness's perception, helpful to the understanding of the testimony or determining a fact at issue, and not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge.

  • Can a lay witness provide an opinion on the speed of a vehicle they observed?

    -Yes, a lay witness can provide an approximation of the speed of a vehicle based on their observation, as long as it is not based on specialized knowledge and is helpful in determining the facts of the case.

  • Why might a court not allow a lay witness to state that a driver appeared intoxicated?

    -A court might not allow this because it is better for the witness to testify to direct observations, such as the car swerving or moving erratically, and let the fact-finder determine if those observations suggest intoxication.

  • What preliminary requirements must be met for a witness to be qualified as an expert witness?

    -To be qualified as an expert witness, a person must have knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education in the relevant area of expertise and must be formally recognized by the court as an expert in that field.

  • What are the conditions under which an expert witness may offer an opinion in court?

    -An expert witness may offer an opinion if it will help the court or jury understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue, if it is based on sufficient facts or data, and if it is the product of reliable principles and methods applied by the expert.

  • How do courts assess the reliability of an expert's opinion?

    -Courts assess the reliability of an expert's opinion by considering factors such as whether the underlying theory or technique has been tested, subjected to peer review, has a known error rate, and is generally accepted by experts in the relevant scientific community.

  • What is the difference between the facts or data an expert witness relies on compared to a lay witness?

    -An expert witness can rely on facts or data that experts in their field would reasonably rely on, which may not need to be introduced into evidence, whereas a lay witness is limited to matters within the scope of everyday experiences and understanding.

  • How have the Federal Rules of Evidence changed the historical rule regarding witnesses passing judgment on the ultimate issue in controversy?

    -The Federal Rules of Evidence, specifically Rule 705, have abandoned the historical rule by stating that testimony is not objectionable just because it embraces an ultimate issue, as long as it meets the other applicable rules for opinion testimony.

  • What is the role of the court in determining the admissibility of expert opinions based on hearsay or other inadmissible information?

    -The court has the discretion to admit or exclude expert opinions based on inadmissible information, considering whether the probative value of the information outweighs any potential prejudicial effect on the parties involved.

  • What is the court's role in ensuring that both lay and expert witness opinions are reliable and properly presented?

    -The court has the final decision-making role, ensuring that opinions are supported by adequate foundations, that the witness is qualified to offer the opinion, and that the opinion stems from an appropriate basis. The court can exclude opinions that are not reliable or from unqualified witnesses.

Outlines
00:00
🚨 Judicial Hearings and Opinion Testimony

This paragraph discusses the role of opinion testimony in judicial hearings and trials. It explains that while opinion testimony is generally disfavored, there are circumstances where it is necessary and admissible. The paragraph differentiates between lay witness and expert witness opinion testimony, highlighting the conditions under which each is allowed. Lay witness opinions must be based on personal perception, helpful for understanding or determining a fact at issue, and not based on specialized knowledge. An example is provided where a witness testifies about observing a vehicle's speed, which is an opinion but is admissible due to meeting the criteria. The paragraph also touches on the limitations of lay witness opinions, such as not being able to state whether a driver was intoxicated based solely on observations.

05:01
📚 Expert Witness Testimony and Its Criteria

The second paragraph delves into expert witness testimony, detailing the prerequisites for a witness to be recognized as an expert and the conditions under which their opinions are admissible. Expert witnesses must demonstrate knowledge, skill, experience, or education in their field and apply reliable principles and methods to form their opinions. The paragraph discusses the factors a court considers when assessing the reliability of expert opinions, including peer review, known error rates, and general acceptance within the scientific community. It also addresses the differences between lay and expert opinions, such as the fact that expert opinions do not require personal observation of the facts and are not limited to everyday experiences. The paragraph concludes by emphasizing the importance of having a solid foundation for opinions and the court's discretion to exclude unreliable or unqualified opinions.

Mindmap
Keywords
💡Opinion Testimony
Opinion testimony refers to the statements made by a witness that go beyond merely stating facts and include their interpretations or judgments. In the video, it is emphasized that such testimony is generally disfavored in legal proceedings because the preference is for witnesses to present factual observations and let the judge or jury draw their own conclusions. However, under certain circumstances, opinion testimony can be necessary, helpful, and admissible.
💡Lay Witness
A lay witness is an ordinary person who has no special expertise in a particular field. Their testimony is limited to their personal observations and experiences. The script discusses how lay witness opinion testimony must be rationally based on their perception, helpful to understanding their testimony or determining a fact at issue, and not based on specialized knowledge. An example given is a witness testifying about a vehicle's speed based on their observation, which is within the scope of a layperson's understanding.
💡Expert Witness
An expert witness is a person with specialized knowledge or training in a particular field. They are allowed to offer opinions based on their expertise, which can help the court understand complex evidence or determine facts in issue. The script explains that to qualify as an expert, a witness must be formally recognized by the court and their opinion must be based on reliable principles and methods. An example is a medical doctor testifying about a patient's injuries in a car accident case.
💡Admissibility
Admissibility refers to the legal acceptability of evidence in a court of law. The script discusses the criteria for admissibility of opinion testimony, stating that it must be rationally based on the witness's perception, helpful to understanding the testimony or determining a fact at issue, and not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge for lay witnesses. For expert witnesses, their opinions must be based on sufficient facts or data and reliable principles and methods.
💡Perception
Perception in the context of the script refers to the direct observations or experiences of a witness. Lay witness opinion testimony must be rationally based on their perception, meaning it should be grounded in what they personally observed or experienced. This is crucial for determining the admissibility of their testimony, as seen in the example of a witness describing a vehicle's speed based on their observation.
💡Specialized Knowledge
Specialized knowledge refers to expertise in a particular field that goes beyond everyday understanding. The script notes that lay witness opinion testimony should not be based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge. This distinction is important because it limits lay opinions to what an ordinary person would reasonably infer from their observations, ensuring that their testimony does not overstep into areas requiring expert analysis.
💡Reliable Principles and Methods
Reliable principles and methods are the established theories and techniques that have been tested and are generally accepted in a particular field. The script explains that expert opinions must be based on these reliable principles and methods to be admissible. Factors considered by the court in assessing the reliability of an expert opinion include whether the underlying theory or technique has been tested, subjected to peer review, and is generally accepted by experts in the relevant scientific community.
💡Ultimate Issue
The ultimate issue refers to the central question or dispute in a legal case. Historically, witnesses were not allowed to express opinions on the ultimate issue, but the Federal Rules of Evidence have modified this rule. The script explains that while opinions on the ultimate issue are not objectionable per se, they must still meet other applicable rules. For example, a witness might testify about the actions of a person but not their intentions or mental state, which would be the jury's role to determine.
💡Cross-Examination
Cross-examination is the process in a trial where the opposing party's attorney questions a witness to test the accuracy and credibility of their testimony. The script mentions that during cross-examination, an expert witness may be asked to disclose the facts or data they relied on in forming their opinion. This can be crucial in assessing the reliability of their testimony and determining whether the opinion is based on admissible evidence.
💡Probative Value
Probative value refers to the ability of evidence to prove or demonstrate a point at issue in a case. The script discusses how information that is not normally admissible may be admitted if its probative value outweighs any potential prejudicial effect. This means that the information must be so valuable to the case that its benefits in proving a point outweigh any harm it might cause to a party, such as introducing hearsay evidence to support an argument.
💡Foundation
Foundation in the context of the script refers to the basis or evidence that supports a witness's opinion. Both lay and expert witnesses must establish that they are the appropriate party to offer an opinion and that their opinion is based on an appropriate basis. The court has the discretion to exclude opinions that are not reliable or that come from witnesses who are not qualified to offer them, ensuring that the testimony is based on a solid foundation.
Highlights

Opinion testimony is generally disfavored in judicial hearings or trials.

Witnesses are preferred to state facts and let the jury draw conclusions.

Opinion testimony can be admissible with a good policy reason.

Lay witness opinion testimony must be rationally based on their perception.

Lay witness opinions should help in understanding the testimony or determining a fact at issue.

Lay witness opinions must not be based on specialized knowledge.

Witnesses can provide an approximation of speed based on observation.

Direct observations are preferred over opinions on intoxication.

Expert witnesses need formal recognition by the court before offering opinions.

Expert witnesses must have relevant knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.

Expert opinions must be based on sufficient facts or data and reliable principles.

Courts assess expert opinions based on factors like peer review and general acceptance.

Expert witnesses do not need to personally perceive the facts for their opinions.

Lay witness opinions are limited to everyday experiences and understanding.

The historical rule against witnesses passing judgment on the ultimate issue has been abandoned.

Expert opinions must be supported by adequate foundations and the court has the discretion to exclude them.

Opinions can be powerful tools in determining facts and issues in a case when properly presented.

Transcripts

Browse More Related Video

Lay Witness Testimony vs. Expert Witness Testimony (FRE 701-706) [LEAP Preview — Evidence: 7/14]

Distinguishing fact from opinion

Finding Evidence to Support Author's Claims

Supreme Court of the United States Procedures: Crash Course Government and Politics #20

why I no longer support pit bull ownership

Impeachment of a Witness (FRE 607-609, 611, 613) [LEAP Preview — Evidence: 6/14]

Rate This

5.0 / 5 (0 votes)

Thanks for rating:

Related Tags
Legal TestimonyWitness OpinionsJudicial ProcessExpert EvidenceLay WitnessAdmissibilityCourtroom DynamicsEvidence RulesTrial AnalysisLegal Strategy