CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Opinion & Scientific Evidence
......Limitations of Expert Testimony
.........Inference Jury Qualified to Draw
7 Cards On This Topic:

Consciousness of guilt instructions proper where jury reasonably could find witness' changed statement and testimony were false and the result of pressure from D and his parents.

Trial ct. correctly allowed eyewitness identification expert to generally opine on factors that may effect eyewitness identification and correctly excluded testimony as to discrepancies in a specific witness' identification.

Reversible error to admit human resources expert’s opinion testimony that certain facts were "indicators" that Lab fired P for retaliatory reasons.

Proper to exclude D's expert testimony as to reasonableness of O's action in high speed chase resulting in death; CHP pursuit policy irrelevant to reasonable foreseeableness of O's actions.

If expert explains applicable principles so that jury is as qualified as expert to apply them to case facts, further expert testimony unnecessary.

Expert may properly testify re criminal habits and techniques, but not as inferences that jury is qualified to draw from evidence, e.g., whether D possessed drugs for sale.

Expert may not express opinion on jury issue.