State Ex Rel. Montgomery v. Miller
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GOULD, Judge.
¶ 1 The State seeks special action relief from the trial court’s order granting Defendant’s motion in limine. The trial court’s order precluded the State’s expert from testifying that, based on his retrograde extrapolation calculation, Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration (BAC) was above the legal limit within two hours of driving. Because we conclude the expert’s testimony is admissible under Arizona Rule of Evidence 702, we accept jurisdiction and grant relief.
Facts and Procedural Background
¶ 2 In May 2009, Suzanne Raequel Madrid (“Defendant”) was stopped by the…
2Cases cited29 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
- Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
- United States v. John Ray Bonds (91-3610) Mark Verdi (91-3609) and Steven Wayne Yee (91-3608)Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1994
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- State v. GieseCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2014
- Marsalis v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 2020
- State of Arizona v. Bryan Peter FoshayCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2016
- State v. BaucumCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
- State v. TrujilloCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.