Evidentiary Issues Relating to Forensic Reports. Briana Denney, Esq. of Newman & Denney P.C . Getting the Report into Evidence Lay a foundation to introduce the expert report like you would with any expert report. Stipulate with counsel.
Briana Denney, Esq. of Newman & Denney P.C.
That the court uses the report as a substitute for direct testimony at the trial. Therefore, you are able to cross examine the expert.
Due to the hearsay in the report, the court cannot rely on the opinion of the expert and therefore, the report, without the presence of the expert, unless stipulated to by the parties.
Testimony of the express content of the out-of-court material is inadmissible, but, provided there is proof of reliability of the out-of-court material, testimony regarding reliance upon the out-of-court material to form an opinion may be received in evidence.
An expert may state that he/she relied upon information provided the expert proves that the information is reliable, but that the content of the material is not admissible. Therefore, the expert’s opinion is admissible if he/she formed the opinion upon out-of-court material which is reliable. The expert’s opinion is inadmissible if he/she formed the opinion on out-of-court material which is not reliable.
How to cure the problem that an expert based the opinion on non-reliable evidence?
If the information the forensic based his/her opinion on is not reliable and accepted within the profession as reliable, then the opinions of the expert and the report are not admissible. The only cure is proof of reliability of the information by cross-examination of the collateral.
Another argument regarding hearsay information which was relied upon forming an opinion: The information is corroborative with other, reliable information in the report.
If you wanted to exclude the expert’s opinion and therefore, the report
If you wanted to include the expert’s opinion and therefore , the report, you would argue about the 3rd party sources: