Utah Appellate Court Upholds Fingerprint Identification

From John Bogart, our Utah correspondent:

In State v. Quintana, handed down last week, the Utah Court of Appeals turned away an attack on the admissibility of expert testimony on fingerprints. Rule 702 decisions are reviewed for abuse of discretion. Admissibility under 702 depends on whether the evidence “will assist the trier of fact” and whether the expert is qualified to offer an opinion on the subject. If the expert is testifying on “novel scientific principles and techniques” then the court determines threshold reliability under Rimmasch (which amounts to the current federal standard). If the testimony concerns scientific methods that have “attained general acceptance in . . . the relevant scientific community” then the additional test of Rimmasch does not apply (i.e., it meets Rule 702 pre-Daubert). The court found that fingerprint identification is not novel scientific evidence and so is admissible if it is likely to aid the trier of fact and is offered by one qualified to opine on the subject.

The concurring opinion, however, surveying applicable literature, notes that fingerprint evidence has “never truly been put to the test in either the courtroom or the scientific community.” The concurrence suggests that juries should be instructed about the weaknesses in fingerprint examiner training and identification protocols, and the lack of uniform standards or training.

This decision contradicts the suggestion in other recent cases that Rimmasch applies to all expert evidence. The decision therefore adds to the confusion in Utah case law about the standards for admission of expert evidence.

In Utah, then, as elsewhere in the nation, consensus remains elusive on the reliability of fingerprint identification.

Update: At least one reader has apparently gotten the impression that the sentence after the block quote in this post -- the sentence beginning "In Utah, then ... " -- was authored by John Bogart. We should clarify that it was not. The claim that consensus is elusive on the reliability of fingerprint identification is our own. We have no idea what Mr. Bogart's views on that subject, if any, may be. Double update: Well, now we do.