CHAMBERLIN v. CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE

JAMES O. BROWNING, District Judge

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Defendant's Motion in Limine No. V: Admissibility of Witnesses' Lay Opinions Regarding David Chamberlin's Mental State and Intoxication and Testimony Regarding Chamberlin's Admissions, filed June 17, 2005 (Doc. 111). Consistent with the Court's ruling at the hearing on this motion, and for the reasons given at the time of the hearing, the Court will grant in part Lehocky's motion and deny in part his motion.

The witnesses may testify about their observations of Chamberlin's appearance and actions, as well as any admissions Chamberlin made to them. The witnesses may offer an opinion on whether Chamberlin was intoxicated on May 29, 2000. Lehocky may not, however, solicit any opinion from the witnesses on whether Chamberlin was using illegal drugs on May 29, 2000. Witnesses may offer their conclusions about his mental capacity as long as it is in a lay person's terms and not in terms of a medical expert.

IT IS ORDERED that Defendant's Motion in Limine No. V: Admissibility of Witnesses' Lay Opinions Regarding David Chamberlin's Mental State and Intoxication and Testimony Regarding Chamberlin's Admissions is granted in part and denied in part.