The court ruled on the admissibility of expert toxicological opinion evidence regarding blood alcohol concentration (BAC) levels and signs of intoxication during a trial.
The expert was deemed qualified to testify on BAC levels and their physiological effects based on assumptions.
However, the court excluded the expert's opinion on whether an individual exhibited signs of intoxication or others' ability to detect impairment, holding that these are matters of common knowledge for a jury and do not require expert testimony.
The court also cautioned against experts developing hypotheses and sifting through evidence to support them.
