Ex Parte: Nicholas Tullett v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that experts in various fields can testify “to a reasonable scientific certainty,” thereby implying that they cannot testify to an absolute certainty
• noting that “relevant scientific community” includes experts who are “actually involved in latent-print analysis and those who actually research the reliability of latent-print analysis”
• noting that Dr. Zabell opined that “there is no ACE-V manual and there is no precise statement as to how certain determinations are made”
• noting that the “subjective component” does not prevent the analysis from being “reliable or accurate”
• affirming lower court’s conclusion that ACE-V methodology was generally accepted within the relevant scientific community, after conducting Frye hearing involving three expert witnesses from the State and two expert witnesses for the defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).