Does a prosecution expert witness related case-specific hearsay to the jury and treated it as true to support her opinion?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Malik, 16 Cal.App.5th 587, 224 Cal.Rptr.3d 435 (Cal. App. 2017):

Here, we do not have a situation in which a prosecution expert witness related case-specific hearsay to the jury and treated those hearsay statements as true to support her opinion. Instead, the prosecutor related the case-specific hearsay, through cross-examination of the defense expert , and asked whether she considered that information in forming her conclusion defendant suffered from PTSD. In other words, the case-specific hearsay was being used to impeach the expert's testimony. Generally, "a witness testifying as an expert ... may be fully cross-examined as to ... the matter upon which his or her opinion is based and the reasons for his or her opinion." ( Evid. Code, 721, subd. (a).) "The scope of cross-examination of an expert witness is especially broad. [Citation.] Evidence that is inadmissible on direct examination may be used to test an expert's credibility, though the court must exercise its discretion under Evidence Code section 352 to limit the evidence to its proper uses." ( People v. Gonzales (2011) 51 Cal.4th 894, 923, 126 Cal.Rptr.3d 1, 253 P.3d 185.)

Other Questions


How have the courts treated the prosecution's proffer by the prosecution of opinions rendered by qualified experts using scientifically accepted methods of analysis? (California, United States of America)
When will an expert witness not reveal the content of a report prepared or opinion expressed by a nontestifying expert? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances will the prosecution of a witness in a criminal case involving compelled testimony differ from the prosecution related to matters about which he testified? (California, United States of America)
Is there any case law that supports the argument that prosecution witnesses or defense experts were wrong at trial? (California, United States of America)
Does section 2034(i)(2)(B) of the California Medical Code require an expert witness fee to be paid to a treating physician who also gives standard care opinion testimony? (California, United States of America)
When a witness testifies as a percipient witness rather than an expert, can you disregard any opinion that you find unbelievable, unreasonable or unsupported? (California, United States of America)
Does an expert who is an expert in medical malpractice have to produce a declaration of opinion based on hearsay statements? (California, United States of America)
Can an expert witness whose opinion is based on inadmissible material describe the material that forms the basis of the opinion? (California, United States of America)
Is a witness's opinion or opinion intertwined with the witness statements? (California, United States of America)
In assessing the prosecution's reasonable diligence in locating a missing witness so that it can use that witness's preliminary hearing testimony, does the prosecution need to conduct a "twofold inquiry"? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.