Why Minnesota Prosecutors Shouldn't Always Rely on Expert Witnesses
By Sullivan Rice
In recent years, Minnesota prosecutors have increasingly depended on expert witnesses to strengthen their cases, particularly in areas like victim behavior, including delayed reporting, battered women’s syndrome, and more. This trend is evident in criminal sexual conduct, date rape, domestic assault, and other violent criminal cases. While expert testimony can provide valuable insights, there are situations where it should be excluded. This article discusses why prosecutors in Minnesota should meet certain prerequisites before presenting expert witnesses at trial. If you are facing serious criminal charges in Minnesota, ensure you consult with an experienced criminal defense attorney, preferably one who is a Board Certified Criminal Law Specialist.
“Juries will sometimes buy expert opinions just because they have lots of letters behind their names. However, sometimes they are simply bought and paid for.”
Reasons to Exclude State’s Witnesses
Lack of Disclosure: Transparency is crucial for a fair trial. The prosecution must disclose the qualifications of expert witnesses, their findings, opinions, and the basis for those opinions. Failure to do so deprives the defense of the opportunity to assess the expert's credibility, potentially undermining the fairness of the proceedings.
Questionable Qualifications: Experts must have the necessary expertise in their fields. If an expert lacks qualifications or experience in a specific subject, their testimony may not be reliable. The defense should challenge the qualifications of any expert who is not adequately qualified.
Irrelevant Testimony: Expert testimony should help the jury understand complex issues or evidence. If the testimony does not contribute meaningfully to the case, it may confuse or mislead the jury and should be excluded.
Lack of Scientific Basis: Expert testimony must be based on reliable methodologies and established scientific principles. Testimony that lacks foundational reliability due to flawed methodologies or unsupported scientific principles should be excluded.
Prejudicial Impact: Evidence must have probative value that outweighs its potential prejudicial effect. Testimony that is more likely to confuse the jury than assist them should be excluded to ensure a fair trial.
“Some things are not in the province of the 'expert'. This is for the jury to decide and the expert will simply confuse matters.”
While expert witnesses are essential in legal proceedings, their use by the State must adhere to specific standards. Lack of disclosure, inadequate qualifications, irrelevant testimony, unreliable scientific basis, and substantial prejudicial impact are valid reasons for excluding expert testimony. Upholding fairness and an unbiased trial requires a critical evaluation of expert witnesses presented by the prosecution. Under these circumstances and more, an experienced defense attorney should strive to keep unqualified experts off the stand.
If you are facing serious criminal charges in Minnesota, including criminal sexual conduct, date rape, child molestation, domestic assault, or other violent crimes, consult an experienced Minnesota criminal defense attorney. Contact Jack Rice Defense for a free confidential consultation at (651) 447-7650. When your life is on the line, ensure Jack Rice Defense is by your side.
Jack Rice is a nationally recognized and award-winning criminal defense lawyer, named Minnesota Super Lawyer for 2023, Among the Best Lawyers of 2022, and winner of the Minnesota Attorney of the Year Award for 2021. He founded Jack Rice Defense and was awarded the Professional Excellence Award from the MSBA in 2020. Jack is an MSBA Board Certified Criminal Law Specialist, former Prosecutor, and former U.S. Central Intelligence Agency Officer with decades of experience representing clients in cases ranging from sex crimes and child pornography to domestic assault, DWI, and murder.
