No. 18-7971
Kilunnun Adyden Chivoski v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: admissibility admissibility-threshold child-sexual-abuse daubert daubert-standard expert-testimony expert-witness gate-keeping-hearing kumho-tire peer-review psychological-testimony
Latest Conference:
2019-03-22
Question Presented (from Petition)
Should a district court be required to conduct a hearing under Daubert to consider the admissibility of expert testimony when the proffered expert admits that there is an absence of experimental psychological research in the relevant area, and there are no peer reviewed studies on the issue?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Should a district court be required to conduct a hearing under Daubert to consider the admissibility of expert testimony when the proffered expert admits that there is an absence of experimental psychological research in the relevant area, and there are no peer reviewed studies on the issue?
Docket Entries
2019-03-25
Petition DENIED.
2019-03-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/22/2019.
2019-02-27
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-02-11
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 18, 2019)
Attorneys
Kilunnun Adyden Chivoski
C. Renee Manes — Federal Public Defender of Oregon, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent