Ultimate issue (law)
Encyclopedia
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
.
'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 federal rules of evidence
were changed. Now in the United States
, federal courts and some states have rules of evidence
that 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 jurisdiction
s.
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.
The expert witness testimony is confined to giving an opinion on whether the defendant had a serious mental disorder at the time of the offense, and explaining the symptom
s and characteristics of any diagnosis
given, including other testimony regarding the defendant's mental status (mens Rea
) and motivation
. The expert witness cannot make a statement addressing the issue of whether the legal test for insanity has been met. That is left to the judge
and jury. The restriction of expert opinion on ultimate issues includes any testimony on the criminal elements, including testimony that would bear on the mental state of the defendant relevant to ultimate legal decisions to be decided by the triers of fact.
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 cannot testify to legal conclusions (ultimate issues), the rationale being that mental health professional are not attorneys. Judicial discretion
remains in determining the limits of testimony as well, such that any testimony that "wastes time' or is irrelevant can be barred. The rationale for this restriction was stated in the legislative history of the rule as the following:
The result is that large gray areas remain regarding exactly what testimony is allowed. 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".
, 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" was not 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 would not 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 would not 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 was not capable of committing such a crime, but is an opinion unrelated to guilt
.
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
.
Criminal law
Criminal law, is the body of law that relates to crime. It might be defined as the body of rules that defines conduct that is not allowed because it is held to threaten, harm or endanger the safety and welfare of people, and that sets out the punishment to be imposed on people who do not obey...
is a legal issue at stake in the prosecution of a crime
Crime
Crime is the breach of rules or laws for which some governing authority can ultimately prescribe a conviction...
for which an expert witness
Expert witness
An expert witness, professional witness or judicial expert is a witness, who by virtue of education, training, skill, or experience, is believed to have expertise and specialised knowledge in a particular subject beyond that of the average person, sufficient that others may officially and legally...
is providing testimony
Testimony
In law and in religion, testimony is a solemn attestation as to the truth of a matter. All testimonies should be well thought out and truthful. It was the custom in Ancient Rome for the men to place their right hand on a Bible when taking an oath...
.
Example
If the issue is the defendantDefendant
A defendant or defender is any party who is required to answer the complaint of a plaintiff or pursuer in a civil lawsuit before a court, or any party who has been formally charged or accused of violating a criminal statute...
's mental state
Mental state
* In psychology, mental state is an indication of a person's mental health**Mental status examination, a structured way of observing and describing a patient's current state of mind...
at the time of the offense, the ultimate issue would be the defendant's sanity or insanity
Insanity
Insanity, craziness or madness is a spectrum of behaviors characterized by certain abnormal mental or behavioral patterns. Insanity may manifest as violations of societal norms, including becoming a danger to themselves and others, though not all such acts are considered 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.
John Hinckley, Jr.
John Warnock Hinckley, Jr., attempted to assassinate U.S. President Ronald Reagan in Washington, D.C., on March 30, 1981, as the culmination of an effort to impress teen actress Jodie Foster. He was found not guilty by reason of insanity and has remained under institutional psychiatric care since...
, the federal rules of evidence
Rules of evidence
Rules of evidence govern whether, when, how, and for what purpose, proof of a legal case may be placed before a trier of fact for consideration....
were changed. Now in the United States
United States
The United States of America is a federal constitutional republic comprising fifty states and a federal district...
, federal courts and some states have rules of evidence
Evidence (law)
The law of evidence encompasses the rules and legal principles that govern the proof of facts in a legal proceeding. These rules determine what evidence can be considered by the trier of fact in reaching its decision and, sometimes, the weight that may be given to that evidence...
that 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 jurisdiction
Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction is the practical authority granted to a formally constituted legal body or to a political leader to deal with and make pronouncements on legal matters and, by implication, to administer justice within a defined area of responsibility...
s.
Definition
The Federal Rules do not say what falls within the definition of an "ultimate issue." However, a long history case lawCase law
In law, case law is the set of reported judicial decisions of selected appellate courts and other courts of first instance which make new interpretations of the law and, therefore, can be cited as precedents in a process known as stare decisis...
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
Jury
A jury is a sworn body of people convened to render an impartial verdict officially submitted to them by a court, or to set a penalty or judgment. Modern juries tend to be found in courts to ascertain the guilt, or lack thereof, in a crime. In Anglophone jurisdictions, the verdict may be guilty,...
. One court excluded a psychologist
Psychologist
Psychologist is a professional or academic title used by individuals who are either:* Clinical professionals who work with patients in a variety of therapeutic contexts .* Scientists conducting psychological research or teaching psychology in a college...
's evidence
Evidence (law)
The law of evidence encompasses the rules and legal principles that govern the proof of facts in a legal proceeding. These rules determine what evidence can be considered by the trier of fact in reaching its decision and, sometimes, the weight that may be given to that evidence...
on the credibility
Credibility
Credibility refers to the objective and subjective components of the believability of a source or message.Traditionally, modern, credibility has two key components: trustworthiness and expertise, which both have objective and subjective components. Trustworthiness is based more on subjective...
of prosecution's witness
Witness
A witness is someone who has firsthand knowledge about an event, or in the criminal justice systems usually a crime, through his or her senses and can help certify important considerations about the crime or event. A witness who has seen the event first hand is known as an eyewitness...
on the grounds that it amounted to an "ultimate opinion", meaning this was an opinion that could only be properly reached by a jury.
The expert witness testimony is confined to giving an opinion on whether the defendant had a serious mental disorder at the time of the offense, and explaining the symptom
Symptom
A symptom is a departure from normal function or feeling which is noticed by a patient, indicating the presence of disease or abnormality...
s and characteristics of any diagnosis
Diagnosis
Diagnosis is the identification of the nature and cause of anything. Diagnosis is used in many different disciplines with variations in the use of logics, analytics, and experience to determine the cause and effect relationships...
given, including other testimony regarding the defendant's mental status (mens Rea
Mens rea
Mens rea is Latin for "guilty mind". In criminal law, it is viewed as one of the necessary elements of a crime. The standard common law test of criminal liability is usually expressed in the Latin phrase, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, which means "the act does not make a person guilty...
) and motivation
Motivation
Motivation is the driving force by which humans achieve their goals. Motivation is said to be intrinsic or extrinsic. The term is generally used for humans but it can also be used to describe the causes for animal behavior as well. This article refers to human motivation...
. The expert witness cannot make a statement addressing the issue of whether the legal test for insanity has been met. That is left to the judge
Judge
A judge is a person who presides over court proceedings, either alone or as part of a panel of judges. The powers, functions, method of appointment, discipline, and training of judges vary widely across different jurisdictions. The judge is supposed to conduct the trial impartially and in an open...
and jury. The restriction of expert opinion on ultimate issues includes any testimony on the criminal elements, including testimony that would bear on the mental state of the defendant relevant to ultimate legal decisions to be decided by the triers of fact.
History
The Federal Rules of EvidenceFederal Rules of Evidence
The is a code of evidence law governing the admission of facts by which parties in the United States federal court system may prove their cases, both civil and criminal. The Rules were enacted in 1975, with subsequent amendments....
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.
John Hinckley, Jr.
John Warnock Hinckley, Jr., attempted to assassinate U.S. President Ronald Reagan in Washington, D.C., on March 30, 1981, as the culmination of an effort to impress teen actress Jodie Foster. He was found not guilty by reason of insanity and has remained under institutional psychiatric care since...
for the attempted assassination of U.S. President Ronald Reagan
Reagan assassination attempt
The Reagan assassination attempt occurred on Monday, March 30, 1981, just 69 days into the presidency of Ronald Reagan. While leaving a speaking engagement at the Washington Hilton Hotel in Washington, D.C., President Reagan and three others were shot and wounded by John Hinckley, Jr...
. 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 cannot testify to legal conclusions (ultimate issues), the rationale being that mental health professional are not attorneys. Judicial discretion
Judicial discretion
Judicial discretion is the power of the judiciary to make some legal decisions according to their discretion. Under the doctrine of the separation of powers, the ability of judges to exercise discretion is an aspect of judicial independence...
remains in determining the limits of testimony as well, such that any testimony that "wastes time' or is irrelevant can be barred. The rationale for this restriction was stated in the legislative history of the rule as the following:
The result is that large gray areas remain regarding exactly what testimony is allowed. For example, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts for the following districts:* District of Delaware* District of New Jersey...
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. MacDonaldJeffrey R. MacDonald
Jeffrey Robert MacDonald , is an American convicted in 1979 for the murders of his pregnant wife and two daughters in February 1970. At the time of the murders, MacDonald was an Army officer, medical doctor and practicing physician...
, 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
Defense (legal)
In civil proceedings and criminal prosecutions under the common law, a defendant may raise a defense in an attempt to avoid criminal or civil liability...
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" was not 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 would not be barred since testimony regarding "personality configuration" is general psychological evidence unrelated to any ultimate issues such as intent or malice aforethought
Malice aforethought
Malice aforethought is the "premeditation" or "predetermination" that was required as an element of some crimes in some jurisdictions, and a unique element for first-degree or aggravated murder in a few.-Legal history:...
. Also, an expert witness would not 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 was not capable of committing such a crime, but is an opinion unrelated to guilt
Guilt (law)
In criminal law, guilt is entirely externally defined by the state, or more generally a “court of law.” Being “guilty” of a criminal offense means that one has committed a violation of criminal law, or performed all the elements of the offense set out by a criminal statute...
.
Conclusions
Rules of evidence are meant to screen what evidence the jury may consider to prevent testimony that is 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
Malice aforethought
Malice aforethought is the "premeditation" or "predetermination" that was required as an element of some crimes in some jurisdictions, and a unique element for first-degree or aggravated murder in a few.-Legal history:...
in a murder
Murder
Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human being, and generally this state of mind distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide...
case or specific intent and mens rea
Mens rea
Mens rea is Latin for "guilty mind". In criminal law, it is viewed as one of the necessary elements of a crime. The standard common law test of criminal liability is usually expressed in the Latin phrase, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, which means "the act does not make a person guilty...
.
English law
The position under English law is different from that in the United States as there is no rule preventing an expert from giving an opinion on the 'ultimate issue' in England and Wales. This has been confirmed by the English Courts in both criminal and civil cases.External links
- Pennsylvania Code - Rule 704. Opinion on Ultimate Issue
- Ask your expert the ultimate liability questions
- Rule 704. Opinion on Ultimate Issue
- 639 Insanity -- Scope of Expert Testimony
- Evidence: Expert/Scientific Testimony
- Core Criminal Law Subjects - Evidence: Opinion Testimony
- Cleary and Graham's Handbook of Illinois Evidence