Defense expert testimony
Smith v. United States
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- Terrill Smith's petition asks whether his trial lawyer had to investigate expert testimony on a key issue after the government planned to present its own expert, and whether failing to do so could have affected the verdict.
- Who it affects
- The Ninth Circuit's decision remains in place in Smith's case, but the Supreme Court did not decide whether his lawyer's failure to investigate expert testimony affected the trial.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The dispute focuses on whether defense lawyers must investigate expert evidence when the government plans to use specialized testimony on an important issue.
Question presented
1. Whether, after Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011), trial counsel still has a duty to investigate whether expert testimony could significantly bolster the defense regarding what is obviously a critical issue in a criminal case when it is clear the government will present specialized testimony on the issue. 2. Whether a defendant is prejudiced by the failure to investigate potential expert testimony about a critical issue in the case if a reasonable juror could decline to convict after hearing the expert testimony proffered in postconviction proceedings.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
New analysis added
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Show 2 moreShow fewer
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.