CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Opinion & Scientific Evidence
......Forensic Issues
.........Criminal
............Genetic Fingerprinting (DNA) Inadmissible
9 Cards On This Topic:

Court disapproved of Pizarro II to the extent it concluded evidence regarding any particular population group is inadmissible absent sufficient independent evidence the perpetrator was a member of that group.

FBI's failure to follow correct procedure in RFLP analysis required exclusion of DNA evidence and was prejudicial error.

Woefully inadequate chain of custody of DNA reference sample that criminalist compared with DNA near crime scene, where only other evidence was eyewitness ID, mandated new trial.

Reversal required where FBI and DA relied on D's traits, thus adding unproved traits to perpetrator's profile and providing illegitimate foundation for admission of DNA evidence.

Court abused discretion by not finding FBI's DNA procedure improper, by implicitly finding sufficient evidence of prelim. fact of perp's genotype based on D's, and by admitting DNA evidence, irrelevant without that foundation.

Reference to D's ethnicity not permissible to establish perpetrator's ethnicity, which should have been determined ••independently••.

Court could properly exclude proposed defense expert testimony re DNA testing as irrelevant where it would have no probative value in light of way case being tried, or would have minimal probative value and court exercised discretion.

Statistical probability analysis of DNA evidence not admissible because it fails Kelly-Frye test of general acceptance in the scientific community.

DNA evidence inadmissible as underlying method of calculation of statistical significance of matching patterns lacks general acceptance in scientific community.