Opinion ID: 2319967
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Frye Standard

Text: In the District of Columbia, before expert testimony about a new scientific principle [may] be admitted, the testing methodology must have become `sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.' Williams v. District of Columbia, 558 A.2d 344, 346 (D.C.1989) (quoting Frye, 54 App.D.C. at 47, 293 F. at 1014). The issue is consensus versus controversy over a particular technique, not its validity. United States v. Jenkins, 887 A.2d 1013, 1022 (D.C.2005) (citing United States v. Porter, 618 A.2d 629, 633 (D.C.1992)). Moreover, general acceptance does not require unanimous approval. Porter, 618 A.2d at 634. Once a technique has gained such general acceptance, we will accept it as presumptively reliable and thus generally admissible into evidence. The party opposing the evidence, of course, may challenge the weight the jury ought to give it. Jones v. United States, 548 A.2d 35, 39 (D.C.1988). Although we do not doubt that a technique that has previously been recognized in court as generally accepted may lose that wide acceptance, we conclude that appellant has not shown that to be the case with respect to pattern matching as a way of identifying firearms. [4]