In August 2020, Delilah Diaz was arrested when she drove her boyfriend's car, laden with over $350,000 of hidden methamphetamine, across the U.S. border from Mexico. Her criminal trial tested the permissible scope of expert testimony as to a defendant's intent, ultimately resulting in a decision by the U.S.
Impact of Supreme Court's Ruling On Expert Intent Testimony In 'Diaz v. United States'
The Supreme Court held that expert testimony in a criminal case, as to whether "most people" similar to the defendant have a particular mental state, does not run afoul of the Federal Rule of Evidence's prohibition against expert opinion evidence about whether a criminal defendant had or lacked the mental state required for conviction. Particularly in white-collar cases, where the defendant's intent is often the central disputed issue, the implications of Diaz may be far-reaching.

This premium content is locked for Business Crimes Bulletin subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN Business Crimes Bulletin
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.






