NCJ Number
120792
Journal
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review Volume: 22 Issue: 4 Dated: (June 1989) Pages: 1103-1160
Date Published
1989
Length
58 pages
Annotation
This article examines California's admissibility rules for expert witness testimony in child sexual abuse cases, arguing that the Kelly-Frye standard should be replaced by a modified traditional analysis using evidentiary rules on the relevance of expert testimony.
Abstract
The Kelly-Frye standard of admissibility requires that a new scientific technique used by an expert witness in a child sexual abuse case be generally accepted within the relevant scientific community. The article traces the development of the Kelly-Frye standard, points out the confusions it has caused in the admissibility of psychological testimony, and analyzes conflicting decisions by California courts of appeal on the applicability of the Kelly-Frye standard to expert testimony in child sexual abuse cases. An alternative standard for the admissibility of expert testimony is proposed and compared with Kelly-Frye. The alternative provides a more coherent and predictable standard for testing the admissibility of expert testimony than does the Kelly-Frye standard. 412 footnotes.