Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Supreme Court allows general expert testimony about what ‘most people’ in a role know in Diaz v. United States
Summary
In Diaz v. United States the Court held that testimony about what most couriers in drug-smuggling schemes know does not automatically violate Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b), allowing juries to decide a defendant's specific mental state after hearing general expert background evidence.
Jim Chance introduced Diaz v. United States as the episode's second case, which examines Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b) and whether an expert may testify about what people in a given role commonly know or do without invading the jury's province to determine a defendant's specific mental state.
Evan Lee explained the facts: Diaz was arrested transporting illegal drugs across the border and said she did not know there were drugs hidden in the vehicle; the prosecution presented an expert who testified that most couriers in these schemes know they are transporting drugs because smugglers generally avoid using genuinely 'blind'…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
