Section 10.31 Standard

• Library: Criminal Practice 2012 Supp

a. (§10.31) Standard

The general rule for admissibility of scientific evidence in the past has been the Frye test. Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923). This test allows scientific evidence only when the scientific deduction sought to be entered into evidence is “sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.” Id.

Missouri adopted the Frye test through State v. Stout, 478 S.W.2d 368 (Mo. 1972), and then modified it in State v. Biddle, 599 S.W.2d 182 (Mo. banc 1980), by holding that the proponent of scientific evidence must demonstrate a “wide scientific approval of [its] reliability.” Id. at 191.

In the early 1990s, prosecutors sought to have DNA admitted, and courts around the country held hearings to determine the admissibility of this novel scientific evidence. In United States v. Two Bulls, 918 F.2d 56 (8^th Cir. 1990), the Eighth Circuit held that, whether proceeding under the Federal Rules of Evidence or Frye, 293 F. 1013, the basic requirement for admissibility of DNA evidence included the following:

· Whether the DNA evidence is scientifically acceptable

· Whether there are certain standard procedures that should be followed in conducting these tests

· Whether these standards were followed

Two Bulls, 918 F.2d at 61. Under this review, the Eighth Circuit determined that reversible error occurred because the trial court failed to determine whether the testing procedure that had been used was conducted properly. The Eighth Circuit ruled that there must be a preliminary showing that the DNA profiling was performed properly before expert testimony can be admitted as evidence. United States v. Ortiz-Martinez, 1 F.3d 662 (8^th Cir. 1993).

But Missouri chose not to adopt the last two prongs of the Two Bulls admissibility test. In a case of first impression, the Supreme Court of Missouri relied on precedent and reaffirmed that Frye was the appropriate admissibility standard for the courts to apply when confronted with new scientific evidence. State v. Davis, 814 S.W.2d 593 (Mo. banc 1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1047 (1992). The Davis Court made the admissibility of scientific evidence dependent solely on the first prong set out in Two Bulls, 918 F.2d 56: general acceptance of the test within the scientific community. Ralph Davis, 814 S.W.2d at 602–03. The Supreme Court of Missouri upheld the trial court’s use of discretion in permitting expert testimony on the acceptance of DNA test results in the scientific community. No contradictory...