Everything about Ultimate Issue Law totally explained
An
ultimate issue in
criminal law is a legal issue at stake in the
prosecution of a
crime for which an
expert witness is providing
testimony. For example, if the issue is the
defendant's
mental state at the time of the offense, the ultimate issue would be the defendant's sanity or
insanity during the commission of the crime. In the past, expert witnesses were allowed to give testimony on ultimate issues, such as the applicability of the
insanity defense to a particular defendant. However, after the 1982 trial of
John Hinckley, Jr., the
rules of evidence were changed. Now in the
United States, federal and state rules of
evidence specifically rule out legal conclusions drawn by expert witnesses in their testimony. However, a large amount of judicial discretion is allowed in how this rule is applied, resulting in an uneven application of rules across
jurisdictions.
Definition
The Federal Rules don't say what falls within the definition of an "ultimate issue." However, a long history
case law on the subject suggests that an expert witness runs afoul if he uses the same words (words with legal meaning) that will ultimately be presented to the
jury. One court excluded a
psychologist's
evidence on the
credibility of prosecution's
witness on the grounds that it amounted to an "ultimate opinion", meaning this was an opinion that could only be properly reached by a jury.
History
The
Federal Rules of Evidence adopted in 1975 (and their state counterparts) expressly allowed
expert testimony to include statements on ultimate issues if such statements will be helpful to the judge or jury. In 1984, Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b) was added following the trial of
John Hinckley, Jr. for the
attempted assassination of U.S. President Ronald Reagan. The changes were in part a result of the public
backlash due to Hinckley's successful use of the
insanity defense. These changes, in particular Rule 704(b), put limits on expert witness testimony.
The new rules of evidence restrict the testimony allowed on the ultimate issue. Rule 704(b) states that the mental health expert may testify to the defendant's
mental disorder or defect and its symptoms, but may not offer a conclusion on an ultimate issue such as the sanity or insanity of the defendant. The expert witness must refrain from merely giving the jury a conclusion that pertains to the legal issues at hand and can't testify to legal conclusions (ultimate issues), the rationale being that mental health professional are not attorneys. The rationale for this restriction was stated in the legislative history of the rule as the following: For example, the
Third Circuit Court of Appeals in
United States v. Rutland ruled that testimony from "an extraordinarily qualified handwriting expert" was admissible on the "ultimate issue of authorship of key documents".
Jeffrey R. MacDonald trial
An example of how this change in the rules of evidence can affect trial testimony is demonstrated in an analysis of the 1979 trial of
Jeffrey R. MacDonald, a physician, for the murder of his wife and children, if his trial occurred today. In that trial, an expert testified in support of the
defense hypothesis that someone else committed the murders. Expert testimony that the defendant had a "personality configuration inconsistent with the outrageous and senseless murders of [his] family"
wasn't allowed under the rules of evidence in effect at the time because it was considered confusing and misleading. However, under Rule 704(b) this character testimony wouldn't be barred since testimony regarding "personality configuration" is general psychological evidence unrelated to any ultimate issues such as
intent or
malice aforethought. Also, an expert witness wouldn't be in violation of 704(b) in use today if he gave testimony regarding the defendant's positive behaviors, such as acting like a loving father and husband, which might create the impression that he wasn't capable of committing such a crime, but is an opinion unrelated to
guilt.
Conclusions
Rules of evidence are meant to screen what evidence the jury may consider to prevent testimony that's mere opinion from infringing upon the territory of jury decision-making. Rule 704(b) reversed the trend toward permitting the testimony of experts on the ultimate issue. Since so much faith is placed in the jury system, limiting what a jury can consider narrows the jury's options. As in the past, lay witnesses may testify to facts only.
The result of rule 704(b) is to prevent expert witnesses such as psychologists and psychiatrists from testimony regarding how the defendant's mental state affected an
element of the crime or an element of the defense. It has been ruled that 704(b) bans expert opinions on mental states affecting other
elements, not only on questions of insanity, but also on questions on all mental states forming an element of a crime or defense such as
premeditation in a
murder case or
specific intent and
mens rea. Much of the testimony on psychological issues can be meaningless without professional conclusions rendered. Thus expert witnesses have become less useful to judges, and especially to juries, because the result is indirect and incomplete testimony without a clear summation of the expert's viewpoint.
[Further Information]
Get more info on 'Ultimate Issue Law'.
|
External Link Exchanges
Do you know how hard it is to get a link from a large encyclopaedia? Well we're different and will prove it. To get a link from us just add the following HTML to your site on a relevant page:
<a href="http://ultimate_issue__law.totallyexplained.com">Ultimate issue (law) Totally Explained</a>
Then simply click through this link from your web page. Our crawlers will verify your link, extract the title of your web page and instantly add a link back to it. If you like you can remove the words Totally Explained and embed the link in article text.
As long as your link remains in place, we'll keep our link to you right here. Please play fair - our crawlers are watching. Your site must be closely related to this one's topic. Any kind of spamming, dubious practises or removing the link will result in your link from us being dropped and, potentially, your whole site being banned. |
