Commonwealth v. Lykus’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 76 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably 17 Cal. 3d 24 - People v. Kelly (1976), United States v. Downing (1985)
10 federal appellate · 76 state decisions — followed in 18 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Frye v. United States · United States v. Addison · Commonwealth v. Bonomi · Commonwealth v. a Juvenile · 266 Cal. App. 2d 437 - People v. King
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[l]imited in number though the experts may be, the requirement of the Frye rule of general acceptability is satisfied, in our opinion, if the principle is generally accepted by those who would be expected to be familiar with its use.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Wheeler · Reed v. State““See McCormick, Evidence § 203, p. 491 (2d ed. 1972), where it is said, ‘ “General scientific acceptance” is a proper condition for taking judicial notice of scientific facts, but not a criterion for the admissibility of scientific evidence. Any relevant conclusions which are supported by a qualified expert witness should be received unless there are other reasons for exclusion.’ The suggestions by this author and others (see the concurring opinion of Mager, J., in the Worley case, supra, 263 So.2d 613, 615 [1972]) urge that the opinions of a qualified expert should be received and that the considerations similar to those expressed in the Frye and Fatalo cases should be for the fact finder as to weight and value of the opinions. “There is no need for modification of the general principle of the Frye or Fatalo cases in order to uphold the judge’s ruling in this case. Examination of (1) the evidence as to admissibility presented before the judge, (2) judicial opinions from other jurisdictions, and (3) relevant scientific writings provides convincing proof to justify admission of the evidence. The considerable reliability proved by the Tosi experiment, the greatly added reliability induced by the application of further skills by the experienced examiner working under forensic conditions, and the totality of the evidence received at the voir dire hearing which tended to minimize the importance and weight of adverse or skeptical writings all serve to support a conclusion of genera”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Reed v. State“[The] Frye standard does not require unanimity of view, only general acceptance; a degree of scientific divergence of view is inevitable. In this case we are disposed to give greater weight to those experts who have had direct empirical experience in the field of spectography [voiceprints].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.