Opinion ID: 1127477
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: analysis

Text: A person is qualified to testify as an expert if he has special knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education sufficient to qualify him as an expert on the subject to which his testimony relates. (Evid. Code, § 720, subd. (a).) (13) `The trial court is given considerable latitude in determining the qualifications of an expert and its ruling will not be disturbed on appeal unless a manifest abuse of discretion is shown.' ( People v. Cooper (1991) 53 Cal.3d 771, 813 [281 Cal. Rptr. 90, 809 P.2d 865].) (12b) The trial court properly excluded Veach's expert opinion as to when Lingle was impaled. First, Veach lacked the qualifications necessary to render such an opinion. He had no medical, serology, or pathology training. He had viewed only eight corpses in the two years he had been a homicide investigator, none of which involved a similar injury. He also had only a limited understanding of the manner in which the cause and time of death is clinically determined. In sum, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting Veach's expert testimony.