Since I have received quite a bit of feedback on this issue, I will provide several posts regarding application of Daubert in a series on this topic. The Frye standard of general acceptance of the expert’s methodologies is replaced by the scientific knowledge standard pursuant to Daubert. Fla. Stat § 90.702 (2013) provides:
90.702 Testimony by experts.—If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact in understanding the evidence or in determining a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify about it in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if:
(1) The testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data;
(2) The testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and
(3) The witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.
The qualification of the expert lies within the discretion of the trial judge. Fla. Stat § 90.702 follows the federal standard that in the author’s humble opinion is more strict than the previous Frye standard especially relative to pure opinion testimony that will be subject to challenge if not predicated squarely on the Daubert test regarding the reliability.