DeClue, G., (2004). On the Admissibility of Testimony Utilizing an Aide-mémoire in a Frye State. WebPsychEmpiricist. Retrieved (date) from

When assessing an individual’s risk for future violence generally or future sexual violence specifically, psychologists and other mental-health professionals are aided by the use of forensic assessment instruments. In actuarial risk assessment, a risk-assessment instrument allows the evaluator to combine risk factors via a pre-determined mathematical formula. Guided clinical risk assessment, also known as structured professional judgment, utilizes an aide-mémoire (memory aid) consisting of a checklist of risk factors to consider and a guide for collecting and considering the data. Most currently used risk assessment instruments have been developed within the past ten years or so. When an evaluator testifies in court using a novel scientific technique, the admissibility of that testimony is subject to challenge following legal rules described in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993) or Frye v. United States, (1923). One such case, Collier v. State (2003), was an involuntary civil commitment proceeding regarding a sex offender alleged to be a sexually violent predator. A Florida District Court of Appeal held that the State had not met its burden to demonstrate the general scientific acceptability of the Sexual Violence Risk-20 (SVR-20; Boer, Hart, Kropp, & Webster, 1997), a set of structured professional guidelines for assessing risk of sexual violence. This article addresses the general question of how to consider whether an aide-mémoire passes the Frye test (Frye v. United States, 1923) and the more specific question of whether the SVR-20 could pass a Frye test in Florida. The author concludes that the SVR-20 is now Frye admissible.
Download the pdf