STATE OF FLORIDA
v.
KENYATTA BETHLEY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
An expert need not be a statistician to testify regarding statistical significance of a DNA match if the expert demonstrates sufficient knowledge of the database grounded in study of authoritative sources.
[1] An expert need not be a statistician to testify regarding the statistical significance of DNA evidence, provided the expert demonstrates sufficient knowledge of the datab…
[2] Certiorari is the appropriate remedy to review nonfinal pretrial orders in criminal cases that negatively affect the State's ability to prosecute.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“An expert need not be a statistician to testify regarding the statistical significance of a DNA match.”
Statement of the applicable legal standard for DNA statistical testimony.
Kenyatta Bethley moved in limine to exclude statistical testimony regarding DNA evidence from the State's expert at trial. The trial court granted the…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Daubert Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
KELLY, Judge.
The State petitions for a writ of certiorari to review an order granting Kenyatta Bethley's motion in limine to exclude from his trial statistical testimony regarding DNA evidence. We grant the petition and quash the order. An expert need not be a statistician to testify regarding the statistical significance of a DNA match. Darling v. State, 808 So. 2d 145, 158 (Fla. 2002).
However, the expert must "demonstrate a sufficient knowledge of the database grounded in the study of authoritative sources." Id. (quoting Murray v. State, 692 So. 2d 157, 164 (Fla. 1997)); see also Butler v. State, 842 So. 2d 817, 828 (Fla. 2003) ("[A] sufficient knowledge of the authorities pertinent to the database is an adequate basis on which to render an opinion."). We conclude the State's expert satisfied this requirement and therefore, the trial court departed from the essential requirements of the law in excluding her testimony. See State v. Pettis, 520 So. 2d 250, 253 (Fla. 1988) (stating that certiorari is the appropriate remedy to review nonfinal pretrial orders in criminal cases which negatively affect the State's ability to prosecute).
Petition granted.
SILBERMAN and VILLANTI, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Pettis, 520 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 1988)
- Dolan Darling v. State, 808 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 2002)
- State v. Evans, 692 So. 2d 157 (Fla. 1997)
- Butler v. State, 842 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 2003)