Legal Opinion
United States v. Raymond
District Court, D. Maine
Decided April 2, 2010No. Criminal 09-144-P-HPublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE
D. BROCK HORNBY, District Judge.
On March 18, 2010, by oral order, I Granted the defendant James Raymond’s motion in limine to exclude prosecution expert Kenneth V. Lanning’s testimony. I ruled that Lanning’s anticipated testimony about the behavioral patterns of child molesters and their victims — as it might be used in this case to suggest the defendant’s criminal intent or the truthfulness of the victim’s testimony — does not satisfy the fit or reliability requirements of Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert v. Merrell Dow…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Kumho Tire Co. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- General Electric Co. v. JoinerSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Ruiz-Troche v. Pepsi Cola of Puerto Rico Bottling Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
- United States v. ShayCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Morris v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2011
- People v. ConyacColorado Court of Appeals · 2014
- Perez v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2013
- Samaan v. St. Joseph HospitalDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2010
- U.S. Bank National Ass'n v. JamesDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2010
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.