U.S. v. Brown

In prosecution on charge that defendant-police officer willfully deprived victim of his 4^th Amendment right to be free from unreasonable seizure, Dist. Ct. did not abuse its discretion in excluding proposed testimony from defendant’s expert witness, who would have testified that defendant’s actions during arrest of victim were consistent with police dept. policy. Record showed that defendant had punched victim several times after victim had been handcuffed, and defendant’s compliance with dept. rules was neither sufficient nor necessary to satisfy 4^th Amendment requirement that defendant act reasonably when arresting individual. Moreover, while there is no per se rule excluding instant proposed testimony, Dist. Ct. appropriately exercised its discretion in excluding said testimony, where: (1) expert’s explanation of police dept. procedure would not add anything that jurors could not ascertain from viewing videotape of incident and applying their own everyday experience to determine defendant’s guilt or innocence; and (2) admission of expert’s opinion had potential for jurors to inappropriately defer to expert’s testimony rather than to draw their own conclusions.