Can an expert testify about their reasons for their opinions before a jury?

California, United States of America

The following excerpt is from People v. Dews, F060623 (Cal. App. 2013):

Generally, an expert may testify about the reasons for his opinions. (People v. Montiel (1993) 5 Cal.4th 877, 918.) "However, prejudice may arise if, '"under the guise of reasons,"' the expert's detailed explanation '"[brings] before the jury incompetent hearsay evidence."' [Citation.]" (Id. at pp. 918-919.) Thus, a trial court may "exclude from an expert's testimony any hearsay matter whose irrelevance, unreliability, or potential for prejudice outweighs its proper probative value." (Id. at p. 919, italics added.)

"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Try it today free of charge!

The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.

Other Questions

Can an expert testify before the jury in a personal injury trial without disclosing their reasons for their opinion to the jury? (California, United States of America)

Does admission of an expert opinion without disclosing to the jury its entire hearsay basis implicates the constitutional right to jury trial? (California, United States of America)

Is an expert's need to consider extrajudicial matters, and a jury's need for information sufficient to evaluate an expert opinion? (California, United States of America)

Is there a reasonable likelihood that the jury understood the instruction that a jury would not convict appellant of a charge of sexual assault simply because they concluded beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)

Does the trial court instruct the jury on the limited admissibility of statements relied on by Edinger, the expert who gave evidence at trial on the basis of an expert opinion? (California, United States of America)

Does the absence of an instruction defining reasonable doubt result in a jury failing to apply the same reasonable doubt test? (California, United States of America)

What is the difference between a reasonable and unreasonable plaintiff and a reasonable plaintiff under a "reasonable implied assumption of risk" approach? (California, United States of America)

Does a jury's misconduct in a jury trial prejudice a defendant who refused to take the witness stand because the jury did not want to hear from him? (California, United States of America)

What is the test for evidence that the appellant could reasonably reasonably reasonably expect the appellant to have knowledge of a crime? (California, United States of America)

What is the test for a jury to determine whether a defendant's failure to instruct the jury on an element of the crime is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)

Can an expert testify about their reasons for their opinions before a jury?

"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Other Questions

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.

Company

Product

Resources