Baraka v. Commonwealth
Kentucky Supreme Court
194 S.W.3d 313 (2006)
- Written by Joe Cox, JD
Facts
Binta Baraka (plaintiff) was charged with second-degree manslaughter and entered a conditional guilty plea. On appeal, Baraka argued that the trial court erred in allowing the government (defendant) to present certain expert testimony. Baraka was indicted for murdering Brutus Price, and the government alleged that because of a physical altercation between Baraka and Price, Baraka ultimately caused Price to suffer a deadly heart attack. Key to the government’s argument was the testimony of Dr. Christin Rolf, a state medical examiner called to testify to the circumstances regarding Price’s death and Rolf’s findings on examination. Rolf testified that the cause of Price’s death was a heart attack and that the manner of Price’s death was a homicide, which was to say that Baraka committed a criminal act upon Price. Rolf admitted that she lacked information regarding how the altercation in question began and based many of her opinions on information provided to Rolf by police. Baraka argued that allowing Rolf to testify with an ultimate opinion as to the cause of death being homicide was error, largely because the prejudicial impact outweighed the probative value of any such testimony. Kentucky used a modified Daubert standard under which expert testimony must be (1) from a qualified expert, (2) of subject matter satisfying Daubert, (3) relevant and subject to the balancing of probative value and prejudice, and (4) assistive to the trier of fact.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Graves, J.)
Dissent (Johnstone, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 796,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.