Whether expert evidence based on or involving neuroscience and related fields is sufficiently reliable to satisfy the requirements of Federal Rule of Evidence 702 or comparable State rules for the admissibility of expert evidence

Fed. R. Evid. 104(b) advisory committee's note ("If preliminary questions of conditional relevancy were determined solely by the judge, as provided in subdivision (a), the functioning of the jury as a trier of fact would be greatly restricted and in some cases virtually destroyed. These are appropriate questions for juries. Accepted...The evidence for a condition upon which the relevance of evidence depends must be sufficient to support a finding by the trier of fact that the condition exists.

United States v. Weinstock, 153 F.3d 272, 276 (6th Cir. 1998) (upholding trial court's admission of the Physician Practice Profile [which is a statistical data generated from Blue Cross computers] and the fraud....There is a hearsay exception for a memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form, of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made at or near the time by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge, if kept in the course of a regularly conducted activity of a business, institution, association, profession, occupation, or calling if it was the regular practice of that business, institution, association, profession, occupation, or calling to make the memorandum, report, record or data compilation, unless the source of information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness.

United States v. Casas, 356 F.3d 104, 124-125 (1st Cir. 2004) (upholding trial court's admission of several challenged statements as they were admissible non-hearsay pursuant to the co-conspirator exception in Federal....Hearsay is a statement that (i) is made other than at the trial or proceeding at which it is offered and (ii) is offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted by the maker of the statement, the declarant.