Legal Opinion

State v. Baity

Washington Supreme Court

Decided February 3, 2000No. Nos. 66876-1, 66875-2PublishedCited by 64 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTalmadge, J.

We are asked in this case to determine if a drug recognition protocol, used by trained drug recognition officers to determine if a suspect’s driving is impaired by a drug other than alcohol, meets the requirements of Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013, 34 A.L.R. 145 (1923), for novel scientific evidence. We hold that the protocol meets the mandate of Frye. An officer may testify concerning such drug impairment, subject to the limitations set forth in this opinion, upon meeting the requirements of ER 702 and 703 for the admission of expert opinion testimony. We reverse the suppression orders…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
  3. State v. CopelandWashington Supreme Court · 1996
  4. State v. CauthronWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  5. State v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1986

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

3Cited by64 opinions

  1. State v. RobertsWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  2. In re the Detention of ThorellWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  3. People v. McKownIllinois Supreme Court · 2010
  4. State v. BaityWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  5. People v. McKownIllinois Supreme Court · 2007

59 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