Utah Rule of Evidence 702 – Expert Testimony
This rule is “inclusive” in the sense that it provides for the admissibility of evidence that might not otherwise be allowed. It is not intended to create reasons for the exclusion of evidence.
Testimony is Not Limited to Only Opinion Evidence
A common misconception among prosecutors (and some defense attorneys) is that evidence admissible under this rule is limited to “opinion” testimony. This is wrong. The rule expressly states that an expert “may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise….” Utah R. Evid. 702(a) (italics added).
The standard established by Rule 702 is that such testimony (fact or opinion) is allowed under the rule “if the expert’s scientific technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue.”
Qualifying as an Expert Witness in Utah
A PhD degree is not required for a witness to qualify as an expert under Utah law. Police commonly cite to their “training and experience” as a basis for their “expert” opinion and fact testimony. Prosecutors may be reluctant to acknowledge the same standards when assessing the qualifications of an expert proposed by the defense.
Rule 702 provides that a witness may qualify as an expert based on “knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.”