Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

United states v thigpen opinions and expert testimony

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ase or defect (testimony that schizophrenia does not necessarily deprive a person of ability to understand wrongfulness of actions held admissible) Thigpen. Texas allows for experts to testify to the mental conditions of the D at the time of the case: "She did or did not appreciate the wrongfulness at the time of the crime" Still can't use legal terminology (can't say she was "insane"), but can testify as to her specific mental condition at the time of the crime!! TORRES v. COUNTY OF OAKLAND [Opinions and Expert Testimony: Opinion on Ultimate Issue FRE 704] Facts: Race discrimination case; Torres claims she was passed over for promotion because of her status as a Filipino, she loses. Dr. Torega allowed to testify that in his opinion she was not "discriminated against based on her national origin" Issue: Was it error for the trial court to admit the testimony of Dr. Quiroga that Mrs. Torres had not been "discriminated against based on her national origin"? Appellant argues that because it was a "legal conclusion" it was not "helpful" to the jury as required by Rule 701 Holding: Because Dr. Quiroga's testimony was couched as a "legal conclusion" it was not helpful to the j...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 08/28/2008 for the course N 483 taught by Professor Wellborn during the Summer '08 term at University of Texas at Austin.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online