Brooks v. People
Supreme Court of Colorado
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Martinez
In this case, we consider the admissibility of expert testimony describing the scent tracking and purported identification of a criminal defendant by a trained police bloodhound. • Specifically, we determine whether the “general acceptance” standard embodied in Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C.Cir.1923), or the scientific validation factors enumerated by the U.S. Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993), are useful to analyze scent tracking evidence. 1
We conclude that testimony .on this subject is not…
2Cases cited31 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
- Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
- State v. RoscoeArizona Supreme Court · 1984
- People v. HamptonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- People v. ShreckSupreme Court of Colorado · 2001
- Masters v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 2002
- Logerquist v. McVeyArizona Supreme Court · 2000
- Salcedo v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 2000
- People v. RamirezSupreme Court of Colorado · 2007
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.