Opinion ID: 1855302
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 15

Heading: whether the trial court committed reversible error in denying mr. humphrey's motion to interrogate reginald brooks and deloris jean epps on the results of polygraph tests by a state polygraph examiner

Text: ¶ 47. Despite having previously moved the trial court to exclude the lie detector tests, Humphrey made a motion in limine to use lie detector results against two of the State's key witnesses, Jean Epps and Reginald Brooks, for impeachment purposes. The trial court denied this motion. Humphrey concedes that the current law in Mississippi is that polygraph evidence is inadmissible. Carr v. State, 655 So.2d 824, 836 (Miss.1995). ¶ 48. Humphrey cites several federal cases in support of his position that the polygraph evidence should have been admitted. However, these cases are predicated on the test for admissibility of scientific evidence applied in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993). This State has declined to adopt the Dauberttest and continues to use the time-proven test set out in Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013, 1014 (D.C.Cir.1923). See Gleeton v. State, 716 So.2d 1083, 1086 (Miss.1998). Recently this Court has stated we find that testimony pertaining to a witness's offer to take a polygraph, whether it be a witness for the State or the defense, is not admissible at trial. Weatherspoon v. State, 732 So.2d 158, 162 (Miss.1999). Moreover, this Court has also specifically addressed the issue of whether polygraph evidence is admissible to impeach the credibility of witnesses, and has held it is not. Tavares v. State, 725 So.2d 803, 811 (Miss.1998). This assignment of error is therefore without merit.