Testimony by Experts — Rule 702

• Jurisdiction: Colorado

Testimony by Experts — Rule 702

SUMMARY OF RULE 702

• The expert must possess scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge that will help the trier of fact to determine a fact in issue or understand the evidence.
• The expert may be qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.
• The expert opinion may include the ultimate issue to be decided by the trial court (CRE 704).

LEGAL AUTHORITIES

U.S. Supreme Court Authority

• All expert evidence must be both relevant and reliable. Trial court must determine whether the theory or technique: (1) has been or can be tested; (2) has been subject to prior review or publication; (3) has a known or potential error rate; and (4) has been generally accepted in the scientific community. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993). The trial judge is a gatekeeper to preliminarily assess whether the reasoning or methodology is scientifically valid, and whether the reasoning or methodology may be applied to the facts of the case.
• The court's gatekeeper role of determining relevancy and reliability applies to all types of expert testimony and not just scientific testimony. Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999).

Colorado Authority

• Colorado focuses on CRE 702 for flexibility to govern the ad-missibility of scientific evidence. The focus is relevance and reliability. When determining reliability, trial courts should examine whether the scientific principles are reasonably reliable and whether the expert is qualified to testify to such matters. People v. Shreck, 22 P.3d 68 (Colo. 2001).
• If the trial court applies CRE 702 to determine the reliability of scientific evidence, it should conduct a broad inquiry of factors relevant to the case. People v. Shreck, 22 P.3d 68 (Colo. 2001).
• The theory expounded by the expert's testimony need not be absolutely accepted, but must be reasonably accepted. Salazar v. American Sterilizer Co., 5 P.3d 357 (Colo. App. 2000).
• Testimony of properly qualified medical experts may be admitted even if the expert cannot testify that his or her conclusion is based on a "reasonable medical probability or certainty." The testimony must be relevant, reasonably reliable, and not substantially outweighed by the danger of prejudice. People v. Ramirez, 155 P.3d 371 (Colo. 2007).
• An expert may be qualified by experience. People v. Bornman, 953 P.2d 952, 955 (Colo. App. 1990) (licensed auto dealer qualified to give car value).
• An expert

...