2d Circuit Upholds Evidence from Detective Testifying as Both Fact Witness and Expert

In the past, the Second Circuit has cautioned of the risks involved when a law enforcement officer wears two evidentiary hats, offering both fact and expert testimony. It now appears, however, that there is no per se rule in the Second Circuit barring the practice. Yesterday, the court upheld testimony from a detective who testified in both capacities. From the opinion:

Her expert testimony was brief and related only to a few general practices of street-level drug dealers, none of which was in dispute in this case. Her testimony as to facts pertinent to this particular case was also brief and, more to the point, sufficiently separate and distinct from her expert testimony to raise no concern that the line between the two would be "hard to discern."

See United States v. Barrow, No. 03-1074 (2d Cir. Mar. 2, 2005) (Sack, Raggi, & Hall, JJ.).