Question

standard and introduced a new framework for assessing judges admissibility of scientific evidence. the court held that trial judges should act as gatekeepers, tasked with assessing the reliability and relevance of scientific evidence based on factors such as peer review, error rates, and general acceptance within the scientific community. this ruling established what is now known as the daubert standard, which provides a more flexible and inclusive approach to the admissibility of scientific evidence. the daubert standard allows for a broader range of scientific evidence to be considered in court proceedings, provided it meets certain criteria of reliability and relevance. influence on the criminal justice system the frye standard and the daubert standard have both played crucial roles in shaping the admissibility of scientific evidence in the criminal justice system. the frye standard, with its emphasis on general acceptance within the scientific community, provided a conservative approach to admitting scientific evidence. while it ensured a certain level of reliability, it also limited the types of evidence that could be presented in court, potentially excluding newer scientific techniques and advancements. in contrast, the daubert standard expanded the scope of admissible scientific evidence by focusing on factors such as reliability and relevance, rather than strict adherence to general acceptance. this approach has facilitated the incorporation of cutting - edge scientific methods and technologies into court proceedings, allowing for a more comprehensive evaluation of evidence. overall, the evolution from the frye standard to the daubert standard reflects a broader trend towards a more nuanced and rigorous assessment of scientific evidence in the criminal justice system. by setting clearer guidelines for the admissibility of such evidence, these standards have helped to enhance the fairness and reliability of legal 7. what effect did the daubert standard have on the admissibility of scientific evidence? a) it narrowed the scope of admissible evidence. b) it expanded the range of admissible evidence. c) it abolished the use of scientific evidence in court. d) it made no impact on the admissibility of evidence. 8. what broader trend does the evolution from the frye standard to daubert standard reflect? a) a shift towards reliance on eyewitness testimony b) a move towards stricter sentencing guidelines c) a trend towards a more nuanced assessment of scientific evidence d) a decrease in the use of forensic evidence in court proceedings short answer question: 9. discuss the influence of the frye standard and the daubert standard on the admissibility of scientific evidence in the criminal justice system.

Explanation:

1. The Daubert Standard expanded the scope of admissible scientific evidence by considering a broader range of scientific evidence that meets reliability and relevance criteria.
2. The evolution from the Frye Standard to the Daubert Standard reflects a trend towards a more nuanced assessment of scientific evidence, moving away from just general acceptance in the scientific community to considering multiple factors of reliability and relevance.
3. The Frye Standard emphasized general acceptance in the scientific community, providing a conservative approach and limiting the types of evidence. The Daubert Standard focused on reliability and relevance, expanding the scope of admissible scientific evidence and allowing for the incorporation of cutting - edge scientific methods into court proceedings.

Answer:

1. b) It expanded the scope of admissible evidence.
2. c) A trend towards a more nuanced assessment of scientific evidence
3. The Frye Standard was conservative, emphasizing general acceptance and limiting evidence types. The Daubert Standard is more flexible, focusing on reliability and relevance, expanding the scope of admissible scientific evidence.