The state of New York follows the Frye test for expert witness admissibility. State v. David D., 37 N.Y.S.3d 685 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016). Under this test, for evidence to be admissible it must be “generally accepted as reliable by the relevant scientific community.” Id. To determine if the evidence is generally accepted, the court analyzes whether the expert has used “accepted techniques” to get the results the expert is testifying to. State v. Ralph P., 39 N.Y.S.3d 643 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016). The “principle or discovery” used by the expert must have “passed the mere experimental stage and become demonstrable scientific knowledge generally accepted as valid within the relevant scientific community.” People v. Bullard-Daniel, 42 N.Y.S.3d 714 (N.Y. Ct. Cl. 2016). To support the method, parties can use “scientific treatises, published papers, books or other learned writings demonstrating acceptance of the scientific principle within the applicable scientific community.” Id. The court does not determine whether the expert’s findings are correct, but rather, the court determines whether “those espousing the theory or opinion have followed generally accepted scientific principles and methodology in evaluating clinical data to reach their conclusions.” Ralph, 39 N.Y.S.3d 643. It is important to determine “which scientific community should be assessed to determine general acceptance.” Id. The community that the court determines to be appropriate should not be too narrow as to only involve a small number of experts, as a community that is too small will not suffice as a valid community for purposes of accepting the expert’s method. Id.
