MUSTAFA, AKA BROWN
v.
UNITED STATES

U.S. | 1986-11-10
No. 86-143
479 U.S. 953 Supreme Court of the United States (1986) Positive Treatment
Cited by 10 cases
Dissent
Justice White, with whom Justice Brennan joins,

Justice White, with whom Justice Brennan joins,

dissenting.

In this case the trial court admitted, over petitioner’s objection, the testimony of a purported expert on blood spatter techniques.

On appeal, the Court of Military Appeals held that the testimony in question was admissible under Military Rule of Evidence 702, which is worded identically to Federal Rule of Evidence 702. The court held that the so-called Frye test for determining the admissibility of expert testimony, see Frye v. United States, 54 App.

D. C. 46, 47, 293 F. 1013, 1014 (1923), was superseded by the 1975 enactment of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The court described Military Rule 702 as establishing a much lower threshold than Frye for determining whether a given person is an expert. This conclusion is supported by decisions interpreting Federal Rule of Evidence 702 as establishing a more flexible standard of admissibility than the Frye test. See, e. g., United States v. Downing, 753 F. 2d 1224 (CA3 1985).

Other courts, however, have interpreted Federal Rule of Evidence 702 as incorporating the Frye test. Barrel of Fun, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 739 F. 2d 1028, 1031, n. 9 (CA5 1984); United States v. McBride, 786 F. 2d 45, 49 (CA2 1986).

I would grant certiorari to resolve this conflict on an obviously recurring and important issue.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Christophersen v. Allied-Signal Corp., 939 F.2d 1106 (5th Cir. 1991)
    …Court has not ruled on whether enactment of the Federal Rules of Evidence implicitly overruled Frye, or incorporated it. See United States v. Mustafa, 22 M.J. 165 (C.M.A.) (holding that enactment of Federal Rules superseded Frye test), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 953, 107 S.Ct. 444, 444-45, 93 L.Ed.2d 392 (1986) (White, J., & Brennan, J., dissenting) (noting need to resolve conflict in circuits over whether Rule 702 superseded or incorporated Frye). The Supreme Court has, however, championed the adversarial pro…
  • Towne v. Dugger, 899 F.2d 1104 (11th Cir. 1990)
    …s not presented to the district court, it is not properly before us on appeal. Furthermore, two panels of this Court have previously declined to extend Stone v. Powell in this manner. DeAngelo v. Wainwright, 781 F. 2d 1516 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 953, 107 S.Ct. 444, 93 L.Ed.2d 392 (1986); Jarrell v. Balkcom, 735 F. 2d 1242 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1103, 105 S.Ct. 2331, 85 L.Ed.2d 848 (1985).…
  • Tukes v. Dugger, 911 F.2d 508 (11th Cir. 1990)
    …Stone v. Powell issue not raised before Supreme Court) (Powell, J., concurring); DeAngelo v. Wainwright, 781 F. 2d 1516, 1518-19 (11th Cir.) (“this circuit specifically has refused to extend Stone beyond the fourth amendment context”), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 953, 107 S.Ct. 444, 93 L.Ed.2d 392 (1986); Jarrell v. Balkcom, 735 F. 2d 1242, 1251-53 (11th Cir.1984) (confessions obtained in violation of Miranda not barred from consideration in federal collateral proceedings by Stone v. Powell doctrine), cert. deni…

Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw