Three years ago, Florida legislators passed a controversial bill that affected almost every kind of court case in the system – including criminal cases. The change involved the standard to which expert witnesses are held in court. Their expert qualifications, their methodology, their testimony – all of this came under greater scrutiny when justices did away with the previous “Frye Standard” and instead adopted the “Daubert Standard,” which is used in federal courts and in most other states.
This was largely deemed a positive move for two groups: Criminal and corporate civil defendants. However, personal injury lawyers and some state attorneys have taken issue with it. The Florida Bar is the group that has asked the Florida Supreme Court to consider reverting back to the Frye Standard.
The Frye standard asks the judge to consider whether to allow expert witness testimony into evidence based only on whether the it represents principles that are considered generally accepted in that particular field. The Daubert standard, meanwhile, requires judges to use a more stringent standard. Judges are asked to allow the expert witness testimony only if it’s based on sufficient facts or data, if it’s the product of reliable methods and principles and the expert witness has applied the methods and principles of the case correctly. Often, this requires something of a mini-trial before the trial. Continue reading