Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Third Circuit· 4/29/2004

United States v. Byron Mitchell

Citations

  • 365 F.3d 215
  • 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 8474
  • 2004 WL 908359

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that a district court wouldn’t abuse its discretion by “dispensing with the hearing altogether if no novel challenge [to latent fingerprint evidence] was raised”
  • noting that although ACE-V verification may not be blinded, it still constitutes “peer review” that favors admission of the method
  • explaining that the absence of factual findings did not require a different standard of review where the district court “assessed extensive live testimony” over a five-day Daubert hearing
  • describing the FBI \sliding scale\ standard, which considers both the quality and quantity of matching points
  • describing the FBI “sliding scale” standard, which considers both the quality and quantity of matching points
  • concluding friction ridge analysis is generally accepted in the “forensic identification community”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Barry, Becker, Greenberg

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

102 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

42 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named United States v. Byron Mitchell

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.