Unlike the Daubert standard, the general premise in Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923) states that an expert opinion is admissible if the scientific technique on which the opinion is based is “generally accepted” as reliable in the relevant scientific community.Click to see full answer. Considering this, why is Frye v United States important?1923) was a case that established the Frye standard, a test to determine the admissibility of scientific evidence. It provides that expert opinion based on a scientific technique is admissible only where the technique is generally accepted as reliable in the relevant scientific community.Furthermore, is the Frye standard still used? The Frye standard has been abandoned by many states and the federal courts in favor of the Daubert standard, but it is still law in some states. Similarly, you may ask, what was the Frye vs US case? Citing Frye v. United States, 54 App. D.C. 46, 47, 293 F. 1013, 1014 (1923), the court stated that expert opinion based on a scientific technique is inadmissible unless the technique is “generally accepted” as reliable in the relevant scientific community.What is a Frye motion?Frye Motion Law and Legal Definition. The term Frye motion comes from the case, Frye v. 1923), a case discussing the admissibility of polygraph test as evidence. A motion that is raised before or during trial, to exclude the presentation of unqualified evidence to the jury.