Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Frye v. United States
Frye v. United States
3968
Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia
1
Frye v. United States 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923)
found. The broad ground, however, upon which Numerous cases are cited in support of this rule.
they plant their case, is succinctly stated in their Just when a scientific principle or discovery
brief as follows: crosses the line between the experimental and
demonstrable stages is difficult to define.
"The rule is that the opinions of experts or
Somewhere in this twilight zone the evidential
skilled witnesses are admissible in
force of the principle must be recognized, and
evidence in those cases in which the matter
while courts will go a long way in admitting
of inquiry is such that inexperienced
expert testimony deduced from a well-recognized
persons are unlikely to prove capable of
scientific principle or discovery, the thing from
forming a correct judgment upon it, for the
which the deduction is made must be sufficiently
reason that the subject-matter so far
established to have gained general acceptance in
partakes of a science, art, or trade as to
the particular field in which it belongs.
require a previous habit or experience or
study in it, in order to acquire a knowledge We think the systolic blood pressure deception test
of it. When the question involved does not has not yet gained such standing and scientific
lie within the range of common experience recognition among physiological and
or common knowledge, but requires psychological authorities as would justify the
special experience or special knowledge, courts in admitting expert testimony deduced from
then the opinions of witnesses skilled in the discovery, development, and experiments thus
that particular science, art, or trade to far made.
which the question relates are admissible
The judgment is affirmed.
in evidence."
350 *350