This document discusses the Frye case, which established that expert testimony must be based on techniques generally accepted by the relevant scientific community. It then outlines the Daubert standard, established in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, which replaced Frye and established that judges act as gatekeepers in determining if expert testimony is both relevant and reliable. It notes that over half of US states and federal courts have adopted Daubert. The document provides details on the Daubert trilogy of cases and amendments made to Rule 702 regarding expert witness testimony.

2. FRYE CASE AND
DAUBERT STANDARD
-BY SHIVANI SHARMA
Volunteer Of AFRS

3. CONTENT
Introduction
to Frye case
Daubert
standard
Use of
Daubert
standard

4. INTRODUCTION
Mr. Frye was convicted of second-degree
murder after the lower court disallowed
him from introducing testimonial evidence
relating to the results of a deception test
Mr. Frye had taken following the crime.
Mr. Frye appeals his conviction here.

5. CONTINUE
Synopsis of Rule of Law :- When a
test (such as a systolic blood pressure
deception test) has not gained
scientific recognition from
psychological and physiological
authorities, expert testimony
regarding the results of such a test is
inadmissible.

6. CONTINUE
Frye was charged with and put on trial
for murder. The expert testimony was
held inadmissible by the lower court, he
was convicted of second-degree murder.
The court reasoned that although the
deception test at issue here has a
scientific basis, “just when a scientific
principle or discovery crosses the line
between the experimental and
demonstrable stages is difficult to define.

7. CONTINUE
In the court’s words, as
the deception test was
not “sufficiently
established,” the
testimony related to it
is inadmissible, and the
lower court was correct
to have excluded it.

8. DAUBERT STANDARD
In United States federal law”
The Daubert standard is a
rule of evidence regarding
the admissibility of expert
witness testimony.”
The Daubert trilogy : -
• Daubert v. Merrell Dow
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.(1993)
• General Electric Co. v.
Joiner(1997)
• Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael
1999)

9. CONTINUE
In Daubert standard 7 members of the Court agreed on the following guidelines
for admitting scientific expert testimony:
Judge is gatekeeper
Relevance and reliability
Scientific knowledge =scientific method/methodology
Illustrative factors
In 2000, Rule 702 was amended in an attempt to codify and structure elements
embodied in the "Daubert trilogy."

10. CONTINUE
As amended Apr. 17,
2000, eff. Dec. 1, 2000.)
• In 2011, Rule 702 was
again amended to make
the language more
clear.
RULE 702.
TESTIMONY
BY EXPERT
WITNESSES
(As amended Apr. 17, 2000, eff. Dec. 1, 2000;
Apr. 26, 2011, eff. Dec. 1, 2011)
•While some federal courts still rely on pre-
2000 opinions in determining the scope of
Daubert, as a technical legal matter, any
earlier judicial rulings that conflict with the
language of amended Rule 702 are no longer
good precedent.

11. USE OF DAUBERT STANDARD
• The Daubert standard is now the law in federal court and over half
of the states, the Frye standard remains the law in some
jurisdictions including California, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and
Washington.
• Florida passed a bill to adopt the Daubert standard as the law
governing expert witness testimony, which took effect on July 1,
2013.
• On May 23, 2019:- The Florida Supreme Court accepted the
Daubert standard.
• On August 28, 2020:- The Maryland Court of Appeals adopted the
Daubert standard.
• The trial judges always had the authority to exclude inappropriate
testimony, prior to Daubert, trial courts often preferred to let juries
hear evidence proffered by both sides..

12. REFERENCES
https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/evidence/evidence-
keyed-to-fisher/lay-opinions-and-expert-testimony/frye-v-
u-s/
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/daubert_standard
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard/