Legal Opinion
United States v. Marchado-Erazo
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided June 17, 2013No. Criminal No. 2010-0256PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ROSEMARY M. COLLYER, District Judge.
On the eve of trial, Defendant Noe Machado-Erazo has moved to exclude the testimony of a government expert witness, Special Agent David Magnuson of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, who would testify about cellular telephone site analysis. Mr. Machado-Erazo argues that S.A. Magnuson’s testimony is not based on a sufficiently reliable methodology to be ad missible under the Federal Rules of Evidence and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 592, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993), and that it would therefore be unduly…
2Cases cited12 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
- David Oddi v. Ford Motor CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
- Teresa Ambrosini v. Jorge Labarraque and the Upjohn CompanyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1996
- United States v. Jorge Alberto AlatorreCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Sherrod v. McHughCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
- State v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2017
- United States v. Mosquera-MurilloDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- State v. PattonMissouri Court of Appeals · 2013
- Rothe Development, Inc. v. Department of DefenseDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.