According to the text, approximately how many youths are in some ...

[jon_i]

According to the text, approximately how many youths are in some form of correctional institution in the United States today?
 
  a. 25,000
  b. 54,000
  c. 72,000
  d. 103,000

Question 2

In what ways do special limitations on expert witnesses affect the litigation of criminal cases? Discuss the cases that helped determine limitations on expert witnesses. Include a discussion of Frye and Daubert.
 
  What will be an ideal response?

[Jody Vaughn]

Answer to Question 1

b

Answer to Question 2

In contrast to lay witnesses, expert witnesses are permitted to give opinions on matters about which they have no personal knowledge. Before someone is permitted to give opinions in court, the person must be qualified as an expert witness based on their knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education. But even the opinions of properly qualified experts are not admissible unless they meet other standards for admissibility, such as those specified in Federal Rule of Evidence 702 . For much of the 20th century, the Frye test governed the admissibility of scientific testimony. In Frye v. United States (1923), a federal appeals court refused to allow an expert to testify about the results of a lie-detector test because the instrument had not gained general acceptance in the scientific community. The purpose behind the Frye test was to prevent unfounded scientific principles or conclusions based on such principles from being used at trial. Shortcomings of the Frye test, however, caused the drafters of the federal rules of evidence to replace Frye with rules that the U.S. Supreme Court fleshed out in Daubert v. Merrill-Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993). Daubert established that trial court judges are supposed to act as gatekeepers who have a special obligation to ensure the reliability of scientific evidence. Daubert suggested several factors that might be used in evaluating whether a particular scientific theory, study, or test is both valid and reliable, including whether it: is empirically testable and capable of replication; has been published and/or subjected to peer review; has a known or potential rate of error that is acceptably low; is logical, avoids bias, and has construct validity; adheres to recognized research methods and, if applicable, to proper sampling and statistical procedures for data analysis; and is generally accepted in the relevant scientific community.

[jon_i]

Thanks

[Jody Vaughn]

Welcome