Question

For many years, the Frye Standard was the standard by which the admissibility of testimony was measured. In 1993, a judicial case set forth the most current guidelines for the admissibility of scientific examinations in federal courts. Which of the following judicial cases changed these guidelines?

a) Miranda v. Arizona
b) Roe v. Wade
c) Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals
d) Brown v. Board of Education

Answer 1

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals changed the guidelines for the admissibility of scientific testimony in federal courts, replacing the Frye Standard with new criteria for judges to assess the relevance and reliability of scientific evidence.

Step-by-step explanation:

The judicial case that set forth the most current guidelines for the admissibility of scientific examinations in federal courts was Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals. The Frye Standard, which was previously the standard for admissibility of testimony, was superseded by the guidelines established in the Daubert case. In 1993, the Supreme Court ruled in Daubert that the Frye Standard was inadequate and that federal judges must act as gatekeepers for scientific evidence, determining its relevance and reliability before it can be presented to the jury.