Lear v. Fields
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ESPINOSA, Judge.
¶ 1 In this special action, we are asked to decide whether AR.S. § 12-2203, which governs the admissibility of expert testimony, is constitutional. For the reasons stated below, we accept jurisdiction. But because the respondent judge correctly found the statute usurps the supreme court’s rule-making authority and violates the separation of powers doctrine, we deny relief.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
¶ 2 In the underlying criminal action, petitioner William Lear was charged with continuous sexual abuse of a child, in violation of AR.S. § 13-1417. The victim, Lear’s…
2Cases cited21 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
- State v. ValdezArizona Supreme Court · 1962
- State v. RobinsonArizona Supreme Court · 1987
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- State of Arizona v. Trent Christopher BensonArizona Supreme Court · 2013
- Department of Child Safety v. BeeneCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
- Cornerstone Hospital of Southeast Arizona v. Ernest H. BlackburnCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
- State of Arizona v. Anthony LewisCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
- Dobson v. McClennenCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.