The Florida Supreme Court has decided: Florida (again) follows the Frye rule regarding expert testimony. In summary, the FSSC found that the Florida Legislature could not incorporate the Daubert standard into the rules with its 2013 amendment to 90.702. In a thorough yet somewhat pointed analysis, the Court determined the amendment was unconstitutional. Moving to which standard to apply, the Florida Supreme Court wrote:
We recognize that Frye and Daubert are competing methods for a trial judge to determine the reliability of expert testimony before allowing it to be admitted into evidence. Both purport to provide a trial judge with the tools necessary to ensure that only reliable evidence is presented to the jury. Frye relies on the scientific community to determine reliability whereas Daubert relies on the scientific savvy of trial judges to determine the significance of the methodology used. With our decision today, we reaffirm that Frye, not Daubert, is the appropriate test in Florida courts.
So, it appears that Florida goes back to the simple "general acceptance" theory. Watch for a rule change soon.
The opinion can be found here.