concluding impressive studies regarding eyewitness identification required reversal of per se rule of exclusion
How later courts described this case
- concluding impressive studies regarding eyewitness identification required reversal of per se rule of exclusion
- holding admission of expert witness on eyewitness identification within sound discretion of the court
- "[T]he admissibility of expert testimony relating to the accuracy of eye witness identification rests within the sound discretion of the trial court."
- noting the degree of certainty expressed by the expert goes to the weight of the testimony rather than its admissibility
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
*321 CARTER, Justice
(dissenting).
I dissent. The rule approved by a majority of this court in State v. Galloway, 275 N.W.2d 736 (Iowa 1979), excluding expert testimony concerning the reliability of eyewitness identification was sound and should not now be abandoned.
One of the reasons expressed by this court’s majority for excluding such evidence was:
Explanation of the scientifically identified mechanisms which bring about memory decay may be of academic interest, but it is of little aid to the jury in judging reliability of the particular eye witness identification before them....
Galloway, 275 N.W.2d at 741 . The Galloway majority also expressed the view that the subject of such opinions is not beyond the knowledge and experience of the typical trial juror. Id.
These observations are valid grounds for excluding this category of expert testimony irrespective of the facts and circumstances of a particular case. I would affirm the district court.
MeGIVERIN, C.J., joins this dissent.