Frye vs Daubert: Legal Scientific Evidence

www.charlesjeromeware.com             " Here to make a difference."

FRYE  Standard:

In 1923, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held in the case of  Frye vs. United States,
293 F. 1013 ( D.C. Cir. 1923), that for new or novel scientific evidence to be admissible, it must " have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.'" This standard came to be known as the Frye   standard .

Technically, there are two prongs to the Frye standard:
(1) Identifying the "particular field" or relevant scientific community; and
(2) Demonstrating that novel scientific evidence  is generally accepted in that community.

DAUBERT  Standard (Federal Rules of Evidence):

In 1993, the Supreme Court of the United States ( SCOTUS) held in the case of Daubert vs. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), that the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE), specifically Rule 702, replaced the common law FRYE standard as the evidentiary basis for admitting scientific evidence in Federal courts. SCOTUS found that Rule 702 does not incorporate the general acceptance requirements of the FRYE standard, as a prerequisite for the admission of expert scientific testimony.