From our private database of 35,600+ case briefs...
United States v. Llera Plaza
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
188 F. Supp. 2d 549 (2002)
Carlos Llera Plaza (defendant) was on trial for drug and murder charges. The government (plaintiff) sought to introduce expert testimony from Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) fingerprint examiners. In order to identify fingerprints found at the crime scene, the FBI examiners used the ACE-V procedure. The ACE-V procedure allowed an examiner to compare a fingerprint from an unknown person (a latent print) with a fingerprint from a known person (a rolled print). Specifically, the examiner determined whether the latent print and the rolled print shared characteristics. Based on the number of shared characteristics, the examiner expressed an opinion as to whether there was a match between the latent print and the rolled print. Llera Plaza filed a motion to exclude testimony from the FBI examiners. The district court found that no persuasive information existed regarding the ACE-V procedure’s rate of error. Consequently, the district court ruled that the FBI examiners were not permitted to express an opinion as to whether there was a match between a latent print and a rolled print. The government filed a motion for reconsideration, arguing that the district court should reverse its ruling. The district court held an evidentiary hearing so that new evidence could be submitted. New evidence was submitted indicating that the FBI assessed the ability of its examiners to use the ACE-V procedure. Indeed, the FBI designed proficiency assessments that required examiners to match a latent print with a rolled print. The examiners made very few mistakes on these assessments, such that the rate of error was just under 1 percent. After the evidentiary hearing was concluded, the district court took the motion for reconsideration under advisement.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Pollak, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 618,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 618,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,600 briefs, keyed to 984 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.