United States v. Jorge Alberto Alatorre

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that trial court has discretion with respect to timing of Daubert hearing and that trial court need not conduct pretrial hearing
• holding that trial courts are not compelled to conduct pretrial hearings to discharge the gatekeeping function under Daubert as to expert testimony
• holding trial court did not abuse its discretion when it allowed a defendant to test reliability of expert opinion only through voir dire
• stating that the Supreme Court has “refrained from offering any prescription regarding how the many different kinds of expertise might be evaluated by trial courts” (cleaned up)
• stating that the Supreme Court and the Ninth Circuit have “refrained from offering any prescription regarding how the many different kinds of expertise might be evaluated by trial courts” (cleaned up)
• noting that a district court is not required to hold a Daubert hearing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).