Bill Amendment: FL S1412 | 2013 | Regular Session
NOTE: For additional amemendments please see the Bill Drafting List
Bill Title: Expert Testimony
Status: 2013-04-25 - Laid on Table, companion bill(s) passed, see HB 7015 (Ch. 2013-107) [S1412 Detail]
Download: Florida-2013-S1412-Senate_Floor_Amendment_Delete_All_196848.html
Bill Title: Expert Testimony
Status: 2013-04-25 - Laid on Table, companion bill(s) passed, see HB 7015 (Ch. 2013-107) [S1412 Detail]
Download: Florida-2013-S1412-Senate_Floor_Amendment_Delete_All_196848.html
Florida Senate - 2013 SENATOR AMENDMENT Bill No. CS for SB 1412 Barcode 196848 LEGISLATIVE ACTION Senate . House . . . Floor: WD/2R . 04/25/2013 09:37 AM . ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— Senator Richter moved the following: 1 Senate Amendment (with title amendment) 2 3 Delete everything after the enacting clause 4 and insert: 5 Section 1. Section 90.702, Florida Statutes, is amended to 6 read: 7 90.702 Testimony by experts.— 8 (1) If scientific, technical, or other specialized 9 knowledge will assist the trier of fact in understanding the 10 evidence or in determining a fact in issue, a witness qualified 11 as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or 12 education may testify about it in the form of an opinion or 13 otherwise, if: 14 (a) The testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data; 15 (b) The testimony is the product of reliable principles and 16 methods; and 17 (c) The witness has applied the principles and methods 18 reliably to the facts of the case; however, the opinion is19admissible only if it can be applied to evidence at trial. 20 (2) The courts of this state shall interpret and apply the 21 requirements of subsection (1) and s. 90.704 in accordance with 22 Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 23 (1993); General Electric Co. v. Joiner, 522 U.S. 136 (1997); and 24 Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999). Frye v. 25 United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923), and subsequent 26 Florida decisions applying or implementing Frye no longer apply 27 to subsection (1) or s. 90.704. All proposed expert testimony, 28 including pure opinion testimony as discussed in Marsh v. 29 Valyou, 977 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 2007), is subject to subsection (1) 30 and s. 90.704. 31 Section 2. Section 90.704, Florida Statutes, is amended to 32 read: 33 90.704 Basis of opinion testimony by experts.—The facts or 34 data upon which an expert bases an opinion or inference may be 35 those perceived by, or made known to, the expert at or before 36 the trial. If the facts or data are of a type reasonably relied 37 upon by experts in the subject to support the opinion expressed, 38 the facts or data need not be admissible in evidence. Facts or 39 data that are otherwise inadmissible shall not be disclosed to 40 the jury by the proponent of the opinion or inference unless the 41 court determines that their probative value in assisting the 42 jury to evaluate the expert’s opinion substantially outweighs 43 their prejudicial effect. 44 Section 3. This act shall take effect July 1, 2013. 45 46 ================= T I T L E A M E N D M E N T ================ 47 And the title is amended as follows: 48 Delete everything before the enacting clause 49 and insert: 50 A bill to be entitled 51 An act relating to expert testimony; amending s. 52 90.702, F.S.; providing that a witness qualified as an 53 expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or 54 education may testify in the form of an opinion as to 55 the facts at issue in a case under certain 56 circumstances; requiring the courts of this state to 57 interpret and apply the principles of expert testimony 58 in conformity with specified United States Supreme 59 Court decisions; subjecting pure opinion testimony to 60 such requirements; amending s. 90.704, F.S.; providing 61 that facts or data that are otherwise inadmissible in 62 evidence may not be disclosed to the jury by the 63 proponent of the opinion or inference unless the court 64 determines that the probative value of the facts or 65 data in assisting the jury to evaluate the expert’s 66 opinion substantially outweighs the prejudicial effect 67 of the facts or data; providing an effective date.