![]() “It’s helpful to remember that while not binding, unpublished decisions like Delau are instructional. Real-time admissibility issues deserve some level of anticipation and therefore case law in hand to present to the Court. ![]() The nuances and complexities of a trial can be overwhelming at times. There is an abuse of discretion analysis, followed by Harmless Error – Daniel Talbert, Criminal Defense Rutherfordton NC Shelby Criminal Defense Lawyers – Teddy, Meekins, & Talbert Law Firm “The mountain for defense counsel to climb is both arduous and steep. Was the accused found guilty as a result? Did the wrongfully admitted evidence play a “pivotal role” in determining the verdict of the trier of fact? The “erroneous” admission of evidence must also be prejudicial. Put simply, the Officer’s opinions as to what took place or how things developed are no more reliable than an average layperson, a “non-expert.” Did it Affect the Finding of Guilt?Īlthough seemingly a bright-line rule for counsel, the State gets a second bite at the apple.Įven if improvidently admitted into the evidence, the appellate Court is called to make a big-picture conclusion, to wit: Did that piece of evidence affect the verdict?Įvidence admitted contrary to the Rules of Evidence in North Carolina does not in every instance result in a new trial. It’s improper for the jury to be influenced by the conclusions and opinions of a police officer not qualified as an expert. The trier of fact, the jury in many if not most instances in Superior Court, is charged with the responsibility of drawing conclusions from the evidence as it sees fit. ![]() It does, most decidedly, clearly invade the province of the jury – David Teddy, Cleveland County Defense Attorney “It does not ‘tend’ to subvert the work of the jury as trier of fact, as opined in State v. Sylvester (253 NC 176 – 1960)Įvidence in the form of an opinion, by a non-expert, is not admissible. The jury is just as well qualified as the witnesses to determine what inferences the facts will permit or require – Shaw v. COA19-1030) the Court again reminds legal professionals: In an interesting, albeit unpublished decision by the NC Court of Appeals in North Carolina v. Occasionally, the North Carolina appellate courts have been called on to address Expert Testimony – Rule 702 issues. That comes with good and bad, both for the prosecutor and defense attorney – Daniel Talbert, Criminal Defense Lawyer Rutherfordton NC North Carolina v. “Like it or not, North Carolina is most decidedly a Daubert state. That simply is not the law, anymore, in NC. Unfortunately, despite adopting in large measure the Federal Expert Testimony Rule 702 as discussed by Daubert Tire, some more long-in-the-tooth prosecutors continue to argue the admissibility of Expert Testimony is centered on whether the proponent “knows more than the average juror” standard. The resulting ignominious, at least as defined by criminal defense lawyers in North Carolina, rulings are all too easily and neatly characterized as Harmless Error. Then, as now, the admission of Expert Testimony was deemed in the discretion of the Court.īut for an abuse of discretion, together with balanced with consideration of whether an error in admitting evidence affected the proceedings/verdict, such rulings by the Judge are rarely overturned by the Court of Appeals. Howerton.įor issues not ordinarily known by “lay” or ordinary people, an “expert” was anyone who, due to their training, experience, or education, knew more than the common man or woman. Testimony by experts in North Carolina was for years considered in light of the seminal case of North Carolina v. There are substantive and substantial differences between providing a true, accurate recitation of the facts and crossing the line to answer the ultimate question: Did the accused do what is alleged? What Is Expert Testimony? Opinion testimony in court is subject to consideration by the presiding judge in determining what is admissible as evidence on technical, relevancy grounds. “It’s human nature to seek to tie things together and wrap everything up with a conclusory statement as to the evidence – David Teddy, Criminal Defense Lawyer Shelby NCĪt the same time, while understandable the State may ask the officer and other “lay witnesses” to surmise what they observed on the scene, that may step into the province of the trier of fact. In presenting evidence in court, sufficient to establish the prima facie elements of the alleged criminal charges, the State carries both the Burden of Production and the Burden of Proof.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |