The state of Hawaii does not require courts to follow the Daubert test for the admissibility of expert witness testimony, but instead uses it as part of a larger analysis for expert witness testimony. In re Doe, 981 P.2d 723 (Haw. Ct. App. 1999). In Hawaii, the main test for the admissibility of expert witness testimony is a two-part analysis. First, the court has to ensure that the expert’s testimony “will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue.” Id. The second requirement is that “any inferences or opinions must be the product of an explicable and reliable system of analysis.” Id. Overall, the court must ensure that expert testimony is “(1) relevant and (2) reliable.” Id. The courts in Hawaii utilize the Daubert test to help analyze the relevance and reliability of expert testimony, but its factors are not binding in Hawaii. Id. Thus, courts in Hawaii should consider whether the expert’s testimony has been tested, “subjected to peer review and publication,” the “rate of error,” and whether it has been generally accepted in the “relevant scientific community.” Id.
