Opinion ID: 2227985
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Proper Test for Admission of Expert Testimony in Iowa.

Text: To be admissible in an Iowa court the evidence, of course, must be relevant. Iowa R. Evid. 402. Second, it must be evidence in the form of scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge [that] will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue. Iowa R. Evid. 702. Third, the witness must be qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education. Id. In addition, any potential for an exaggerated effect of the proffered evidence should be considered. Polygraph evidence is illustrative of this problem. We have said that the breadth, sensitivity and importance of the inference from polygraph evidence demands a higher standard of trustworthiness than is required of other kinds of scientific evidence.... In a field where so much depends on subjective analysis by the machine operator and the outcome of trial may well turn on the polygrapher's opinion, we believe a strong showing of scientific acceptance and evidentiary reliability must be made. Conner, 241 N.W.2d at 459 (noting unique and potentially unwarranted impact of polygraph evidence). In the present age of exploding technical and scientific developments and claims of junk science, other expertise might be proffered that will, like polygraph evidence, have the potential to achieve an exaggerated impact on the fact-finding process. Such evidence might be so novel or complex that the court, in its discretion, will require proof of acceptance of the theory or technique in the scientific community, one of the considerations suggested by Daubert, 509 U.S. at 593-94, 113 S.Ct. at 2797, 125 L.Ed.2d at 483; see also Hall, 297 N.W.2d at 85 (complex cases may benefit from input from scientific community).