Lear v. Fields
245 P.3d 911
Ariz. Ct. App.2011Background
- Lear was charged with continuous sexual abuse of a child under A.R.S. § 13-1417.
- State intended to call Wendy Dutton as a blind expert on CSAAS to testify generally about child abuse victims.
- Lear moved to preclude Dutton’s testimony arguing A.R.S. § 12-2203 conflicts with Rule 702 and Frye standard.
- The legislature enacted § 12-2203 in May 2010, effective July 29, 2010, codifying Daubert-style admissibility factors.
- The trial judge held § 12-2203 unconstitutional as usurping the supreme court’s rulemaking and violating separation of powers; he allowed Dutton to testify under Rule 702 and Logerquist.
- Lear sought special action relief; the court accepted jurisdiction but denied relief on the merits, upholding the judge’s ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 12-2203 conflicts with the supreme court’s rulemaking power | Lear argues statute rewrites Rule 702 to adopt Daubert, encroaching on the court's domain. | State argues statute supplements rules and provides objective criteria for admissibility. | Statute conflicts with rules; unconstitutional. |
| Whether § 12-2203 is procedural or substantive and separable from Rule 702 | Lear contends it supplements procedural rules without altering substantive rights. | State contends it functions as a general evidentiary rule aligned with Daubert. | Statute is substantive and unconstitutional; cannot harmonize with Rule 702. |
Key Cases Cited
- Logerquist v. McVey, 196 Ariz. 470 (2000) (rejected Daubert expansion; maintained Frye framework in Arizona)
- Seisinger v. Siebel, 220 Ariz. 85 (2009) (analyzed rulemaking authority and harmonization of statutes with rules)
- State ex rel. Collins v. Seidel, 142 Ariz. 587 (1984) (rules of evidence are procedural; legislature cannot repeal rules)
- State v. Zinsmeyer, 222 Ariz. 612 (App. 2009) (applies related appellate guidance on evidentiary issues)
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993) (foundation for gatekeeping of scientific testimony)
- Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999) (Daubert extends to all expert testimony based on specialized knowledge)