People v. Marx

In People v. Marx (1975) 54 Cal.App.3d 100, the court stated that the "general acceptance" rule finds its rational basis in the degree to which the trier of act must accept, on faith, scientific hypotheses not capable of proof or disproof in court and not even generally accepted outside the courtroom. For example, with lie detector tests, the trier of fact is required to rely on the specialized testimony of the polygrapher, verified at most by marks on a graph, to which the expert's hypotheses gives some relevant meaning. Similarly, total reliance on unfamiliar scientific methodology is required for the voice spectogram, blood tests, breathalyzer tests and radar. With respect to bite-mark identification, the Marx court stated: "What is significantly different about the evidence in this case is this: the trier of fact, here the court, was shown models, photographs, X-rays and dozens of slides of the victim's wounds and defendant's teeth. It could see what we have seen in reviewing the exhibits to determine the admissibility of the evidence. . . . Thus the basic data on which the experts based their conclusions were verifiable by the court." ( Id. , at p. 111.)