View the step-by-step solution to:

Derek is on trial for burglary in a federal district court. While investigating the crime scene, detectives discovered a piece of cheese left at the...

Derek is on trial for burglary in a federal district court. While investigating the crime scene, detectives discovered a piece of cheese left at the scene with teeth marks on it. The prosecution claims that the teeth marks were made by Derek and seeks to offer the testimony of Dr. Jacobs, a dentist who is an expert on dental identification. The prosecution would have Dr. Jacobs testify that there have been written up in peer-reviewed forensic journals, that is has a very low false positive rate, and that it is generally accepted by criminalists as a method of identification. Dr. Jacobs' testimony is

A. Admissible because there has been adequate showing that bite-mark identification is scientifically valid.

B. Admissible because there has been an adequate showing that bite-mark identification is generally accepted in the field.

C. Inadmissible because the evidence is not relevant to an issue in the case.

D. Inadmissible because Dr. Jacobs is not qualified to be treated as an expert

E. None of the above

Recently Asked Questions

Why Join Course Hero?

Course Hero has all the homework and study help you need to succeed! We’ve got course-specific notes, study guides, and practice tests along with expert tutors.

-

Educational Resources
  • -

    Study Documents

    Find the best study resources around, tagged to your specific courses. Share your own to gain free Course Hero access.

    Browse Documents
  • -

    Question & Answers

    Get one-on-one homework help from our expert tutors—available online 24/7. Ask your own questions or browse existing Q&A threads. Satisfaction guaranteed!

    Ask a Question