United States v. Richard Joseph Finley

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a diagnosis involving the use of the DSM-IV was reliable under Daubert
• holding that the exclusion of expert testimony was not harmless because it was “the only evidence of [defendant’s] diagnosed mental disorder, and the [district] court excluded the entire testimony”
• holding that expert testimony regarding the defendant’s \atypical belief system” did not violate Rule 704(b)'s prohibition because \[t]he jury was free to conclude that [the defendant] knew the notes were fraudulent, despite the rigidity of his belief system”
• noting that \[t]he severe sanction of total exclusion of the testimony was disproportionate to the alleged harm\
• noting that “[t]he severe sanction of total exclusion of the testimony was disproportionate to the alleged harm”
• addressing the exclusion of an expert witness' testimony as a sanction for the defendant's alleged failure to give proper notice under Rule 16(b)(1)(C)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).