The following is not meant to be legal advice and may be outdated research.
In People v. Green (1984) 163 Cal. App. 3d 239, the court states that expert testimony, even if uncontroverted, is not binding on the trier of fact, and may be rejected, especially where the experts made speculations. The trier of fact considers the reasons given for expert opinions, and may weigh expert testimony with all of the other evidence. In Green, the testimony of the lay witnesses outweighed expert opinions.
In People v. Murray (1990) 225 Cal. App. 3d. 734, the court states that a jury is not bound to accept a medical expert’s opinion. Jurors should give expert testimony only the weight they think it is entitled. Jurors may disregard expert opinion that they find to be unreasonable. In Murray, though the medical expert opined that the defendant’s brain damage could be permanent, the court concludes that there is no persuasive evidence to find that the defendant is brain damaged because the expert did not conduct any physical tests for brain damage. The expert formed his opinion after mere observations during a single two-hour interview.
Comment Preview