Tag Archives: Expert Testimony

CA10: Use of code words, and time spent with drug dealer, sufficient to support drug convictions

by Emil J. Kiehne Posted on October 9, 2019

In United States v. Duran (opinion by Judge Bacharach), the Tenth Circuit upheld the defendant’s convictions for drug distribution offenses. The evidence was sufficient, although the government offered no direct evidence the defendant possessed cocaine. In telephone conversations with a … Continue reading →

Posted in Opinions and Analysis, Tenth Circuit | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on CA10: Use of code words, and time spent with drug dealer, sufficient to support drug convictions

NM court rejects man’s claim that neighbor’s use of wi-fi and cell phone harmed him

by Emil J. Kiehne Posted on March 6, 2015

The New Mexico Court of Appeals, in an opinion by Judge Jonathan Sutin, has decided Firstenberg v. Monribot, a case that has generated considerable attention in the news media and on some blogs. See here, here, and here. The plaintiff, Arthur Firstenberg, claims that … Continue reading →

Posted in New Mexico Court of Appeals, Opinions and Analysis | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on NM court rejects man’s claim that neighbor’s use of wi-fi and cell phone harmed him

No, police experts can’t testify that a defendant isn’t credible, 10th Circuit says

by Emil J. Kiehne Posted on May 2, 2014

For your weekend pleasure reading, I recommend the Tenth Circuit’s decision this week in United States v. Hill, a case that raises the question “What were they all thinking?” At Stanley Hill’s trial on criminal charges arising from his alleged involvement in … Continue reading →

Posted in Opinions and Analysis, Tenth Circuit | Tagged , , | Comments Off on No, police experts can’t testify that a defendant isn’t credible, 10th Circuit says

It’s not proper to exclude an expert merely because he’s not a specialist, says NM Court of Appeals

by Emil J. Kiehne Posted on July 19, 2013

In Holzem v. Presbyterian Healthcare Services (July 17, 2013), the Court of Appeals issued a reminder that New Mexico’s standard for the admission of expert testimony is liberal. The fact that a doctor is not a specialist, or have a particular … Continue reading →

Posted in New Mexico Court of Appeals, Opinions and Analysis | Tagged , , | Comments Off on It’s not proper to exclude an expert merely because he’s not a specialist, says NM Court of Appeals

Police expert testimony on drug trafficking is not governed by Daubert/Alberico standard

by Emil J. Kiehne Posted on June 12, 2013

In State v. Rael-Gallegos, the defendant was convicted of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. Defendant contended that the cocaine in her possession was for her personal use, not for distribution. At trial, the State presented the expert testimony … Continue reading →

Posted in New Mexico Court of Appeals, Opinions and Analysis | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Police expert testimony on drug trafficking is not governed by Daubert/Alberico standard