CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Opinion & Scientific Evidence
......Forensic Issues
.........Criminal
............Genetic Fingerprinting (DNA) Admissible
 24 Cards On This Topic:
  • E's testimony about another technician's Cellmark DNA report did not violate D’s confrontation rights as the report was not offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter it asserted.
  • No error in admitting E's "dot intensity" analysis, testimony that he relied on population frequency statistic, and his testimony on rebuttal re conclusions from conducting PCR polymarker analysis.
  • Whether or not dot-intensity method valid under Kelly, even assuming DNA test results inadmissible, error overwhelmingly harmless.
  • 26-yr. delay in trying D for 1976 murder was justified and outweighed D's showing of prejudice where, when DNA technology became available to I.D. him and establish his guilt, DA proceeded with promptness.
  • Using population frequency calculation for Whites only did not violate D's due process rights by suggesting perpetrator was of D's racial group where there was other evidence suggesting the perpetrator was White.
  • Trial court did not err in allowing evidence of profile frequency within the 3 most common ethnic populations in CA and the country where race of perpetrator unknown; Pizarro disapproved in part.
  • No error to admit expert testimony re GM testing of blood on D's clothes where judicial decisions have now established GM testing valid and generally accepted in scientific community.
  • Unmodified product rule is generally accepted in relevant scientific community of population geneticists; statistical calculations made utilizing rule meet Kelly standard.
  • Abuse of discretion to deny D's PC 1405 motion seeking DNA testing of water bottle left at crime scene by a robber; trial courts should liberally apply "reasonable probability" standard to permit testing in questionable cases.
  • No abuse of discretion in admitting testimony that a partial DNA profile in two mixed source samples on strangled V's pillowcase was consistent with D's genetic profile—DNA testimony need not be accompanied by statistical analysis.
  • Although D forfeited his objections to DNA evidence, it was properly admitted and there was no ineffective assistance of counsel.
  • D failed to show error in admitting criminalist's testimony re D's blood sample BAL over his chain of custody objection—no evidence deputies, hospital staff, or crime lab did not perform their duties as regularly performed.
  • Capillary electrophoresis to analyze amplified DNA fragments, has general acceptance in relevant scientific community; added complication of analyzing multiple source DNA sample goes to weight, not admissibility, of evidence.
  • Based on out of state precedent, STR testing found generally accepted in scientific community.
  • D's request for continuance to obtain expert whom he believed would say DNA test invalid, properly denied.
  • DA's failure to disclose material exculpatory evidence, that RIA blood test showed D positive for PCP at time of crimes, requires vacating judgment.
  • Profiler Plus DNA test kit does not embrace any new scientific technique requiring a first prong Kelly hearing.
  • PCR matching technique for DNA evidence has general acceptance in scientific community after Morganti.
  • Gamma marker blood analysis by agglutination inhibition and polymerase chain reaction DNA test admissible under Kelly standard.
  • RFLP procedures to determine admissibility of DNA testing satisfy Kelly-Frye; results properly admitted.
  • To introduce DNA evidence under Kelly-Frye in crim. trial, DA must show that not only method, but particular DNA-typing procedure used is generally accepted as reliable.
  • Statistical DNA analysis based on incidence of genetic markers within racial groups not generally accepted because it assumes random distribution without regard to ethnocultural subgroups.
  • Evidence of DNA blood/semen match and testimony re random probability of such match admissible under FRE 702, Daubert & FRE 403 balancing test.
  • Tendencies to be guarded against when interpreting source probability data in DNA cases, especially where D member of substructured population underrepresented in profile databases.


    •