Dr. Carl Coppolino, an anesthesiologist, lived with his wife, Dr. Carmela Musetto, in New Jersey. He developed a romantic relationship with his neighbor, Marjorie Farber. Her husband died in his sleep. The Coppolinos moved to Florida. The widow, Marjorie, followed, purchasing an adjacent lot. Carl asked Carmela for a divorce, so he could marry a rich divorcee, Mary Gibson, whom he met at a bridge club. A devout Italian Catholic, Carmela would not consent. Soon afterward, she died in her sleep. Five weeks later, Carl married Mary.

Marjorie Farber then reported to the police in Florida that Carl killed his wife — she knew, she said, because she helped him kill her husband! New Jersey authorities exhumed Carmela's body. The autopsy revealed a needle puncture mark in the left buttock, a healthy heart and no discernible cause of death. A later autopsy on Marjorie's husband produced evidence of death by strangulation, which was consistent with her story that Carl smothered him in his sleep.

Grand juries in New Jersey and Florida indicted Carl for homicide. The New Jersey trial, which came first, resulted in an acquittal. The jury in Florida returned a verdict of second degree murder, and Coppolino went to prison on a life sentence.

Toxicological testimony was vital evidence in the Florida case. The prosecution's theory was that Carl injected his victims with succinylcholine, a curare-like drug. Dr. Milton Helpern did the autopsies. His chief toxicologist, Joe Umberger, "worked on the tissues for a long time. [I]t was impossible by the methods of toxicologic analysis to find the original substance in the body, as succinylcholine is broken down within minutes to succinic acid and choline. Although these two compounds are normally present in dead tissue, they are there in such small quantities that ordinary techniques fail to detect them. Joe Umberger devised a method that would show up abnormally large amounts of the two substances but would not react with the minute quantities normally present. Using this technique, he eventually proved to his satisfaction that there was an abnormally high concentration of succinic acid in the organs of the body. He could not show that there was an excess in the left buttock itself, as he could not apply the technique to fatty tissue." Milton Helpern, Autopsy 30-31 (1977).

In addition, Dr. Bert LaDu, a pharmacologist on the NYU medical faculty, "found a positive reaction for [a monocholine derivative of succinylcholine that is stable in fat] around the needle track and a less intense reaction in the surrounding fat of the buttock, fading out as the distance from the needle puncture increased." Id. at 32.

The Florida courts managed to allow the prosecution to use this evidence while paying lip service to Frye:

In this case, unlike those involving lie detector tests or intoxication tests, there is a dearth of literature and specific case law to guide the trial and appellate courts. The trial court listened to the testimony of the expert witnesses and in an exercise of his discretion ruled that the tests in question were sufficiently reliable to justify their admission.

On appeal it is incumbent for defendant to show that the trial judge abused his discretion. This the defendant has failed to do. 223 So. 2d at 70-71.