Answer Brief of Appellee - Florida State University College of Law

the time of trial. Hadden, supra. The appellate court may
examine expert testimony, scientific and legal writings, and
judicial opinions in making its determination. Hadden, supra.
THE FACTS RELEVANT TO THE CROSS-APPEAL
Despite the fact that the Frye hearing in this case was
conducted over a period of several months and consumes 1700
pages of transcript, the issue is very narrow. There is not, and
never has been, any dispute that the PET scan procedure, when
correctly conducted, will produce images of the brain which
indicate the level of metabolism in the distinct regions of the
brain. There is no claim, in this case, that the PET scan
conducted on Hoskins was not conducted properly from a technical
standpoint. Likewise, the State does not contend that a properly
conducted and interpreted PET scan is not able to detect a
“hypofrontal lobe abnormality.” 22
Dr. Helen Mayberg is a neurologist who has extensive
clinical and research experience with the PET scan. (R1448-
1453). 23 She was accepted as an expert in the areas of
22
The PET scan uses radioactive glucose (sugar) to measure the
level of metabolism in the brain’s regions. If a region is
“hypometabolic” it has a lower metabolism than a “normal” brain
would have. The issue is what is “normal.”
23
For purposes of this appeal, the State has primarily referred
to Dr. Mayberg’s penalty phase testimony because it is far more
succinct than the Frye hearing testimony, and because it is
properly relied on by this Court in the Frye analysis since that
44