Williamson v. Reynolds

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that microscopic hair analysis does not satisfy Daubert test for admissibility
• determining that microscopic hair comparison analysis was unreliable and inadmissible under the federal screening test pertaining to scientific evidence
• section 3593(f) “specifically states that the jury is to reject ... personal characteristics only in considering whether death is justified. The jury is not instructed to disregard those factors in favoring life instead of death.”
• government’s expert \admitted that hair comparisons are not absolute identifications like fingerprints\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).