Scribd
Upload
117 views4 pages

Case Digest

This case digest summarizes the Frye v. United States case from 1923 and discusses its relevance to the OJ Simpson case. [1] Frye appealed his murder conviction by trying to introduce evidence from a polygraph test that indicated his innocence, but the test was rejected as scientific evidence because polygraph testing had not yet gained general scientific acceptance. [2] While the technology may be more reliable now, the case established the "Frye standard" that scientific evidence must be generally accepted in its field to be admitted in court.

Uploaded by

Grenalyn Quilon
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
117 views4 pages

Case Digest

This case digest summarizes the Frye v. United States case from 1923 and discusses its relevance to the OJ Simpson case. [1] Frye appealed his murder conviction by trying to introduce evidence from a polygraph test that indicated his innocence, but the test was rejected as scientific evidence because polygraph testing had not yet gained general scientific acceptance. [2] While the technology may be more reliable now, the case established the "Frye standard" that scientific evidence must be generally accepted in its field to be admitted in court.

Uploaded by

Grenalyn Quilon
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

CASE DIGEST

FRYE VS UNITED STATES AND OJ SIMPSON

Submitted by:

GRENER C. QUILON

SUBMITTED TO:

MRS. JEVILYN G. PAS-IWEN MADALANG

Submitted on:

11/29/21

A. FACTS OF THE CASE


Appellant was charged with and put on trial for murder. At his trial, Appellant attempted to call
an expert witness to testify that Appellant had taken a systolic blood pressure deception test, and
to further testify as to the results of the test. The expert testimony was held inadmissible by the
lower court, Appellant was convicted of second-degree murder.

B. CLAIM OF THE DEFENDANT

Frye appealed his conviction on the grounds that the lie detector test he had taken he was telling
the truth. He also had an expert prepared to explain the scientific methods used to determine the
outcome of his lie detector test. In 1923, in Frye v. United States, the District of Columbia Court
rejected the scientific validity of the lie detector (polygraph) because the technology did not have
significant general acceptance at that time .

C. USE OF POLYGRAPHY IN THE CASE

The court reasoned that although the deception test at issue here has a scientific basis, just when a
scientific principle or discovery crosses the line between the experimental and demonstrable
stages is difficult to define and the thing from which the deduction is made must be sufficiently
established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs to be
admissible. In other words, the court held that without an established place in science, the test
was still in the blurred realm between experimental science and demonstrated science, and
therefore inadmissible here. In the court’s words, as the deception test was not sufficiently
established the testimony related to it is inadmissible, and the lower court was correct to have
excluded it.

D. DECISION OF THE COURT


The court reasoned that although the deception test at issue here has a scientific basis, just when a
scientific principle or discovery crosses the line between the experimental and demonstrable
stages is difficult to define and the thing from which the deduction is made must be sufficiently
established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs to be
admissible.” In other words, the court held that without an established place in science, the test
was still in the blurred realm between experimental science and demonstrated science, and
therefore inadmissible here. In the court’s words, as the deception test was not “sufficiently
established,” the testimony related to it is inadmissible, and the lower court was correct to have
excluded it.

E. INSIGHT

On the said case, the polygraph test that was conducted by Marston was lacking, especially on the
device used to test the accused. Hence, if the result of Marston’s test is accepted but the court
saying that the accused is innocent and that his alibi is indeed true it could lead to acquittal of a
guilty person, destroying justice. Thus, I think it is just right for the court to reject the polygraph
test in the case during those times. However, in our generation, polygraph test is conducted in a
more advance way. We have a more progress use of technology which gibes us an advantage to
have an accurate result regards to this test. Therefore, I think it is admissible as evidence in court
as lot of countries now use this method that is consider as a great help in solving criminal cases.

VI. REFERENCES

Frye v. United States. Casebriefs Frye v United States Comments. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/evidence/evidence-keyed-to-fisher/lay-opinions-and-
expert-testimony/frye-v-u-s/

Frye v. United States - Significance. Significance - Court, Deception, Test, and Blood - JRank
Articles. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://law.jrank.org/pages/23627/Frye-v-United-States-
Significance.html.
Forensic evidence admissibility & expert witnesses. Forensic Evidence Admissibility & Expert
Witnesses: Introduction. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.forensicsciencesimplified.org/legal/index.htm.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy