- 12 -
testimony.”), affd. without published opinion 990 F.2d 1250 (2d Cir.
1993). Considering the testimony as expert opinion testimony, we do
not believe it is properly based upon “sufficient facts or data” or
upon “reliable principles and methods” applied “reliably to the
facts” of this case, as required by rule 702 of the Federal Rules of
Evidence.11 Earlier in the trial, respondent’s witness had testified
that he had relied on the photocopied pages as the basis for his
conclusion that petitioner’s drug-related income for the first 8
months of 1988 should be computed as eight times approximately
$477,000. At trial, it was apparent that in giving an affirmative
response to the above-quoted leading question, respondent’s witness
was merely reaffirming his prior opinion, which was based on the
photocopied pages. Having concluded that the photocopied pages are
unreliable evidence which respondent has failed to adequately
connect with petitioner, we conclude that the expert opinion
11 Fed. R. Evid. 702 provides as follows:
If scientific, technical, or other specialized
knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand
the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness
qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience,
training, or education, may testify thereto in the form
of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is
based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony
is the product of reliable principles and methods, and
(3) the witness has applied the principles and methods
reliably to the facts of the case.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011