14 Cited authorities

  1. Frye v. United States

    293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923)   Cited 4,086 times   47 Legal Analyses
    Holding that to "admit expert testimony deduced from a well-recognized scientific principle or discovery, the thing from which the deduction is made must be sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs"
  2. People v. LeGrand

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 2588 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 190 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Finding ban on expert testimony inappropriate due to advances in scientific research
  3. People v. Lee

    96 N.Y.2d 157 (N.Y. 2001)   Cited 197 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Rejecting a per se inadmissible rule
  4. People v. Muhammad

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 7302 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 134 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Stating that acquittals on weapon possession counts "did not inherently negate" the element of "intent to cause serious physical injury" of first-degree assault by means of a weapon
  5. People v. Drake

    7 N.Y.3d 28 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 70 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Noting that trial court should instruct jurors that "if they accept the expert's testimony, they may consider it along with all other evidence in the case in determining whether the [state has] proved the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt"
  6. People v. Abney

    2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 7668 (N.Y. 2009)   Cited 55 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Upholding trial court's exclusion of defendant's expert witness testimony on identifications in part because "defendant was not a stranger to either [witness]"
  7. People v. Young

    7 N.Y.3d 40 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 60 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Describing the Appellate Division's finding with respect to the independent source issue as “an issue of fact” and holding that therefore the court “may not disturb” the Appellate Division's finding
  8. People v. Santiago

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 7303 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 48 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing unconscious transference
  9. Young v. Conway

    715 F.3d 79 (2d Cir. 2013)   Cited 21 times
    Acknowledging scientific studies indicate certain circumstances surrounding a crime may impair witness's ability to accurately process what he or she observed. Because many of the factors are counterintuitive, the court “concluded that it was a good idea to make trial judges aware of the existence of this information, in effect, as additional tools to help them with their work”
  10. Styles v. General Motors Corporation

    20 A.D.3d 338 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)   Cited 29 times

    M-2353, M-2418. July 21, 2005. Appeal from judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Donna Mills, J.), entered October 1, 2002, after a jury trial, in favor of plaintiffs in the amount of $5,206,553, held in abeyance, and the matter remanded for a Frye hearing. Hanson Marek Bolkcom Greene, Ltd., Minneapolis, MN (Mary E. Bolkcom of counsel), and Herzfeld Rubin, P.C., New York, for appellant-respondent. Mauro Goldberg Lilling LLP, Great Neck (Barbara D. Goldberg of counsel), for respondents-appellants