Commonwealth v. Mattei

How courts have described this case

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

• deciding on relevance grounds, applying Frye; holding statistics necessary when test could not exclude a person
• expert testimony regarding DNA test results subject to balancing of probative value and unfair prejudice
• lack of nonexclusion statistics could mislead jury into believing results are similarly significant to “exceedingly infinitesimal random match probabilities” routinely presented with match results
• \nonexclusion\ testimony that two DNA samples could be same, or could not, is of minimal probative value \without accompanying statistical explanation of the meaning of nonexclusion\
• “nonexclusion” testimony that two DNA samples could be same, or could not, is of minimal probative value “without accompanying statistical explanation of the meaning of nonexclusion”
• \The law need not wait until the instrument actually does cause serious bodily harm in order to classify the weapon as dangerous\ [citation omitted]

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).