AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Lay witness1/11/2024 The opinions that lay witnesses have been permitted to testify about vary widely throughout jurisdictions. Whether as a first-hand witness to a car accident or crime, lay opinions may be rendered about what the witness observed.Ĭourts have also held that lay witnesses may testify to their perception of the incident if obtained through earlier personal observations. Generally, courts have held that observation of an event or situation clearly falls within the definition of personal knowledge. Of course, what constitutes personal knowledge can be quite broad, as lay witnesses can and do testify to an array of various matters. Lay witnesses, however, are constrained by relying on information they have gained through personal knowledge and rationally based perception. Rather, experts can consider facts that would otherwise be inadmissible, so long as experts in their particular field would reasonably rely on such information. In comparison, Rule 703 allows experts to rely upon facts and data beyond what they have personally observed. Rule 602 specifically exempts expert testimony from this requirement. Rule 602 of the Federal Rules of Evidence requires that a witness may only testify if evidence is sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. While experts may use their knowledge or skill to draw conclusions, lay witnesses can only base their opinions on information they personally observed. The major difference between these two types of witnesses is personal knowledge. (c) not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of Rule 702 Personal Knowledge is Required (b) helpful to clearly understanding the witness’s testimony or to determining a fact in issue and (a) rationally based on the witness’s perception In contrast, Rule 701 of the Federal Rules of Evidence states that if a witness is not testifying as an expert, testimony in the form of an opinion is limited to one that is: (d) the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case (c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods and (b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data (a) the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue Under Rule 702, a witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: Lay opinion testimony is largely defined by what it is not -expert testimony. How Do Lay Opinions Differ from Expert Opinions? In order to ensure that your expert testimony is utilized to its full potential, it is important to note the differences between the two types of witnesses so that both can offer admissible opinions. Now, both lay and expert opinions are admissible at trial, to varying degrees. Once Rule 701 of the Federal Rules of Evidence was enacted, the restrictions on lay opinions began to loosen. However, as the Supreme Court has noted, there is an “inevitably arbitrary line between the various shades of fact/opinion”. The justification was that unless the information was too complex for a jury to understand without the help of an expert, a jury should be able to interpret evidence and draw its own conclusions.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |