Abstract
Daubert v Frye: A State by State Comparison on Expert Qualification
Witnesses are an integral part of any court case. One of the main types is the expert witness. In order for expert witnesses to have both their testimony and opinion entered into evidence, they must first meet a certain standard of admissibility. The federal courts use the Daubert test explicitly, while state courts have the option of using Daubert, or the older Frye test (some states use a hybrid of the two). This paper focuses on the history of the two main tests as well as compares how the expert witness qualification tests are used in New York and California (Frye), Texas and Michigan (Daubert), and Illinois and Georgia (hybrid).
Semester/Year of Award
Spring 4-27-2012
Mentor
Lynnette S. Noblitt
Mentor Department Affiliation
Government
Access Options
Restricted Access Thesis
Document Type
Bachelor Thesis
Degree Name
Honors Scholars
Degree Level
Bachelor's
Department
Government
Department Name when Degree Awarded
Government and Economics
Recommended Citation
Hepburn, Rachel J., "Daubert v Frye: A State by State Comparison on Expert Qualification" (2012). Honors Theses. 28.
https://encompass.eku.edu/honors_theses/28