Arizona State Hospital v. Klein
231 Ariz. 467
| Ariz. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- This special action challenges whether Arizona Rule of Evidence 702 applies to mental-health testimony at a discharge hearing under SVPA (A.R.S. §§ 36-3701 to -3717).
- Charles P. seeks absolute discharge from the Center, with the discharge hearing mandated by A.R.S. § 36-3714.
- The Center designates Goldenstein as its mental-health expert for the discharge hearing and challenges his methodology and qualifications.
- Charles moves to compel a competency and methodology evaluation of Goldenstein, arguing unguided clinical judgment and lack of generally accepted methods are used.
- The superior court orders a Rule 702/Daubert pretrial hearing to assess admissibility of Goldenstein’s testimony and then stays proceedings for special action relief.
- Arizona courts must apply the Arizona Rules of Evidence to discharge hearings, and Rule 702 governs expert testimony, with the court retaining discretion on pretrial gatekeeping.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Rule 702 apply to mental-health testimony at SVPA discharge hearings? | Center: 702 does not apply; only 'competent professionals' may testify under SVPA. | Charles: 702 applies; discharge hearings fall within the Arizona Rules of Evidence per § 36-3704(B). | Rule 702 applies to discharge-hearing testimony. |
| May the superior court preclude or admit expert testimony after a Daubert-type pretrial hearing? | Center: Daubert is not mandatory; admissibility should be decided under 702 without pretrial hearing. | Charles: Daubert gatekeeping is proper to assess reliability of psychological testimony. | Court may conduct a pretrial Daubert hearing but is not required to do so in every case. |
| Is consideration of Goldenstein’s competence or methodology within Rule 702’s gatekeeping scope? | Center: competence under § 36-3701(2) suffices; methodology falls outside 702 admissibility. | Charles: 702 requires reliable methodology; gatekeeping ensures reliability and relevance. | Yes, Rule 702 gatekeeping applies to assess reliability of the expert’s testimony. |
Key Cases Cited
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (U.S. 1993) (gatekeeping to assess reliability of expert testimony)
- Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (U.S. 1999) (flexible admissibility test tied to the facts of the case)
- In re Salem, 465 F.3d 767 (7th Cir. 2006) (trial court may hear evidence on admissibility without separate pretrial hearing)
- Commonwealth v. Bradway, 816 N.E.2d 152 (Mass. App. Ct. 2004) (statutory admissibility of examiner reports; no mandatory rule)
- Janson ex rel. Janson v. Christensen, 808 P.2d 1222 (Ariz. 1991) (statutory construction principles for interpreting statutes)