Legal Opinion

State v. Sheehan

Court of Appeals of Utah

Decided March 1, 2012No. 20090913-CAPublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

CHRISTIANSEN, Judge:

T1 Defendant Robert Michael Sheehan challenges his jury convictions for aggravated burglary, see Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-203 (2008), and aggravated assault, see id. § 76-5-108 (current version at id. (Supp. 2011)). Sheehan argues that the trial court abused its discretion when it failed to hold a Rim-masch or rule 702 hearing to determine whether to admit the State's expert testimony that a palm print found at the seene matched Sheehan's palm print. See generalty Utah R. Evid. 702; State v. Rimmasch, 775 P.2d 388 (Utah 1989). We affirm the trial court's decision in…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. Delaware v. Van ArsdallSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Davis v. AlaskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  5. Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Smith v. Volkswagen SouthtowneUtah Supreme Court · 2022
  2. State v. TurnerCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2012
  3. State v. AugustineCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2013
  4. State v. CowlishawCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2017
  5. Majors v. OwensCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2015

7 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