Legal Opinion · Dissent

Commonwealth v. Fuentes

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 17, 2010No. 817 EDA 2008Published

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION BY

BENDER, J.:

¶ 1 I respectfully dissent. In this case, the trial court branded the defendant with the proverbial “mark of Cain,” designating him a sexually violent predator based on the opinion of an “expert” whose conclusions often descend to speculation and whose testimony would not pass muster in a civil tort action. Designation of a witness as an expert is not an evidentiary wild card and does not render the witness’s opinions inviolable. Opinions for which the witness cannot articulate objectively verifiable factual support are not competent evidence and are not…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  2. Commonwealth v. FeuchtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  3. McMahon v. YoungSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  4. Commonwealth v. MealsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  5. Viener v. JacobsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API