No. 21-5301
Justin Lane Foust v. United States
Tags: daubert daubert-standard expert-testimony federal-rules-of-evidence forensic-evidence general-acceptance handwriting-analysis handwriting-comparison judicial-reliability kumho-tire scientific-methodology
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Immigration
Environmental SocialSecurity Immigration
Latest Conference:
2021-09-27
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Can the admissibility of expert testimony about the supposed author of a forged writing be upheld on a record that shows little (if anything) more than some evidence of general acceptance?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Can the admissibility of expert testimony about the supposed author of a forged writing be upheld on a record that shows little (if anything) more than some evidence of general acceptance? i STATEMENT OF RELATED CASES United States v. Foust, No. 18-cr-00011-F (W.D. Okla.) (judgment entered October 30, 2019) United States v. Foust, No. 19-6161 (10th Cir.) (judgment entered March 2, 2021) ii
Docket Entries
2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-08-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-08-16
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2021-07-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 7, 2021)
Attorneys
Justin Foust
Howard A. Pincus — Fed Pub. Def. for Dist. CO &WY, Petitioner
Howard A. Pincus — Fed Pub. Def. for Dist. CO &WY, Petitioner
United States of America
Brian H. Fletcher — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Brian H. Fletcher — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent