Supreme Court of Connecticut
State v. Raynor
December 4, 2020337 Conn. 527
Summary
The court reversed the Appellate Court's judgment and ordered a new trial because the trial court failed to exercise its discretion to assess whether newer scientific criticism warranted a hearing on the reliability of firearm and toolmark evidence, and because the admission of subsequent-shooting evidence was unduly prejudicial. The court upheld the refusal to require the expert to phrase his conclusions only as "more likely than not," because the defendant supplied insufficient support for that precise limitation. The court also indicated that trial courts may impose appropriate limits on firearm and toolmark testimony when necessary.