## Facts

- Multiple criminal defendants in unrelated pending prosecutions sought to introduce their own polygraph examination results at trial.
- Trial judges ruled against admission, accepting the State’s position that polygraph results were unreliable expert evidence and otherwise inadmissible.
- The defendants sought a writ of superintending control to obtain a statewide ruling permitting admission of polygraph evidence without repeating reliability hearings in each case.
- The supreme court ordered a consolidated evidentiary hearing before a designated district judge to assess scientific reliability under New Mexico’s *Daubert/Alberico* framework.
- After extensive testimony and literature review (focused on the Control Question Technique), the district judge found polygraph testing insufficiently reliable and held polygraph evidence per se inadmissible, also reasoning it was barred as impermissible extrinsic evidence of truthfulness under Rule 11-608(B).
- The matter returned to the supreme court for review of those findings and to determine the governing admissibility standard for polygraph evidence in New Mexico courts.

## Issues

1. Whether polygraph examination results are sufficiently reliable under Rule 11-702 and New Mexico’s *Daubert/Alberico* scientific-evidence standard to be admissible as expert testimony.
2. Whether Rule 11-707(C), which specifically addresses polygraph examiner opinions, eliminates or satisfies the need for Rule 11-702 reliability gatekeeping, or instead operates alongside it.
3. Whether polygraph evidence offered to show a witness is telling the truth is categorically barred by Rule 11-608(B) as extrinsic evidence of specific instances of conduct.

## Decision

- The court held polygraph evidence can satisfy Rule 11-702 reliability requirements under the *Daubert/Alberico* factors and is not categorically unreliable.
- The court held Rule 11-707 is valid and operates in conjunction with Rule 11-702, adding specific conditions and safeguards rather than displacing general expert-testimony standards.
- The court rejected a per se exclusion under Rule 11-608(B), concluding polygraph evidence need not be treated as prohibited extrinsic character evidence in all cases.
- The court declined to adopt a per se inadmissibility rule and held admissibility is case-specific, subject to compliance with Rules 11-702 and 11-707 and to Rule 11-403 balancing.
- The court effectively overturned the categorical exclusion and restored trial-court discretion to admit or exclude particular polygraph evidence under the evidentiary rules.

## Legal Principles

- Scientific or technical evidence is admissible under Rule 11-702 when it is sufficiently reliable under *Daubert/Alberico* and will assist the factfinder; reliability does not require infallibility.
- Polygraph evidence is not per se inadmissible in New Mexico; it may be admitted if an adequate foundation is laid and the court performs reliability gatekeeping.
- Rule 11-707 provides additional polygraph-specific prerequisites and safeguards and must be applied together with Rule 11-702, not as an automatic admission or exclusion rule.
- Rule 11-608(B) does not categorically bar polygraph evidence; admissibility turns primarily on Rules 11-702, 11-707, and Rule 11-403, rather than on a blanket characterization as improper character evidence.
- Even when reliability and rule-specific conditions are met, the trial court may exclude polygraph evidence under Rule 11-403 if risks of unfair prejudice, confusion, or misleading the jury substantially outweigh probative value.

## Conclusion

The court held that polygraph evidence is not categorically excluded in New Mexico criminal cases and may be admitted when it satisfies Rule 11-702 reliability standards, complies with Rule 11-707’s polygraph-specific conditions, and is not excluded under Rule 11-403 balancing.


Lee v. Martinez, 96 P.3d 291 (N.M. 2004)