Court Opinion

ID: 9692043
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 15:38:02.020967+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:27:38.904470
License: Public Domain

DEL SOLE, P.J.,
concurring.
¶ 1 I join the opinion of my colleague, Judge Ford Elliott but write separately to address a point raised in the dissenting opinion of Judge Klein.
¶ 2 I do not view the majority opinion as “takfing] the position that by failing to challenge Dr. Shane’s claim that the literature supported his theories during trial, the defense has conceded that the literature does in fact exist and supports Dr. Shane’s opinion.” Slip Op. at 1106 (Klein, J. dissenting). Rather, once Dr. Shane testified that the literature supported his opinion, he could have been cross-examined regarding the literature. While the defense may have made a tactical decision to forgo that cross-examination, as the dissent surmises, it should not now be granted a second opportunity to do so.
¶ 3 The defense did have an opportunity to explore the literature to challenge the basis of Dr. Shane’s opinion; it chose not to do so.