The Frye hearing in Florida: An attempt to exclude scientific evidence

State Supreme Courts require a minimum threshold of reliability and accepta nce in the scientific community for all medical and similar evidence to be admitted at trial. In Florida and some other states, the courts adhere to w hat is known as the Frye standard, whereas in most states and in Federal Co urts, it is the so-called Daubert standard. The jurisdiction of the present case is Hillsborough County (Tampa), Florida. Forensic pathologists seldom , if ever, are requested to participate in such hearings, unlike their toxi cological and basic science colleagues who are more involved in research me thodology and technical procedures. The burden is on the proponent of the evidence to prove the general accepta nce of both the underlying scientific principle of the test and procedures used to apply that principle to the facts of the case at hand. The trial ju dge has the sole discretion to determine this question and general acceptan ce must be established by a preponderance of the evidence. The authors describe in detail a hearing in a case in which they were all i nvolved. One author (WQS) had researched and documented the original scient ific methodology in the Literature. The situation involved a car and tracto r trailer crash with the two occupants of the car dying of multiple trauma, whereas the truck driver was not injured. Autopsy of the auto driver revea led multiple injuries with exsanguination, and only vitreous humor and live r tissue, but not blood, were tested for ethyl alcohol. The estate of the d river of the automobile brought suit against the owner of the trucking comp any for wrongful death. The plaintiff requested a Frye hearing to question the reliability of testing other body specimens to translate to probable bl ood alcohol level. The testimony, submitted documents, and eventual decisio n by the judge are discussed.