Commonwealth v. 2002 Honda (Kuehner)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding error in evidentiary decision harmless as it would not have substantially affected outcome of case
• noting that we extend “wide latitude” to trial judges “in deciding whether to admit the testimony of an expert witness” (quoting Barrett v. Era Aviation, Inc., 996 P.2d 101, 103 (Alaska 2000))
• setting out, in slightly different fashion, same evidence­ rule-based framework for allowing expert witness testimony
• “The test for determining whether an error was harmless is ‘whether on the whole record the error would have had a substantial influence on the verdict of a jury of (continued...
• \The test for determining whether an error was harmless is 'whether on the whole record the error would have had a substantial influence on the verdict of a jury of reasonable lay[people].' \ (alteration in original

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).