293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923)
Defendant was convicted of second degree murder and argued on appeal that the trial court erred by refusing to allow an expert witness testify as to the result of a systolic blood pressure deception test taken by defendant.
- The court affirmed defendant's conviction.
- The court held that defendant failed to establish that the test was demonstrative and not merely experimental.
- The systolic blood pressure deception test had not gained the requisite standing and scientific recognition among psychological and physiological authorities at the time of trial to justify the introduction of expert testimony regarding the test.
In affirming defendant's conviction, the court held that expert testimony regarding the systolic blood pressure deception test was properly excluded at trial as the test had not gained the required standing and scientific recognition from psychological and physiological authorities.
Recommended Supplements and Study Aids for Evidence
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.