II. BEFORE DAUBERT

IIA. Prior to the Daubert Decision
IIB. Commentaries on the Demise ofFrye

IIA. Prior to the Daubert Decision

Prior to Daubert the applicable federal standard was stated in Frye v. United States, and then in Rule 702, which superseded Frye.  States have their own versions of FRE 702, for example, Mississippi, North Dakota, and Pennsylvania.

Rule 702 has been greatly debated. See Shubha Ghosh's discussion at the Evidence Site:  Assisting the Trier of Fact, 24 Rutgers L. Rec. 2; Forensic Evidence; and  Drafting Committee Comments.

IIB. Commentaries on the Demise of Frye

Annas, George J., Scientific Evidence in the Courtroom: The Death of the Frye Rule, 330 New Eng. J. Med. April 7, 1994

Burke, Brian W., Note: The Admissibility of Novel Scientific Evidence in New York State: Has New York Been Left Out to Frye? 15 Pace L. Rev. 539 (Winter 1995)

Feldman, Martin L., May I Have the Next Dance, Mrs. Frye? 69 Tul. L. Rev. 793 (February 1995)

Gonzalez, Lisa, Note: The Admissibility of Scientific Evidence: The History and Demise of Frye v. United States, 48 U. Miami L. Rev. 371 (November 1999)

Hamilton, Heather G., The Movement From Frye to Daubert: Where Do the States Stand? 38 Jurimetrics J. 201 (Winter 1999).

For more information about the Frye and Daubert rules in various state courts, see Part V: Applications by Trial and Appellate Courts.

Imwinkelreid, Edward J., Frye’s General Acceptance Test vs. Daubert’s Empirical Validation Standard–"Either...Or" or "Both...and"? 33 Crim L. Bull. 72 (January/February 1997)

Leinbach, Robert D., Novel Scientific Evidence After Reese v. Stroh, 71 Wash. L. Rev. 1127 (1996). Abstract.

Petroski, Henry, Daubert and Kumho, 87 American Scientist 402-406 (September/October 1999).

Schwartz, Adina, A "Dogma of Empiricism" Revisted: Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and the Need to Resurrect the Philosphical Insight of Frye v. United States, 10 Harv. J. L. & Tech. 149 (Winter 1997)