Friday, November 03, 2006

Florida Supreme Court Upholds DNA, Hair-Comparison Evidence

Yesterday, the Florida Supreme Court issued an opinion upholding the prosecution's forensic evidence in a capital murder case (albeit indirectly, in post-conviction habeas proceedings alleging ineffective assistance). The court rejected an argument that there was insufficient scientific acceptance of forensic population genetics to support admissibility of the prosecution's DNA evidence under Frye at the time of the defendant's 1995 trial. Meanwhile, no Frye analysis was required at all, the court said, for the prosecution expert's visual and microscopic hair-comparison testimony, which rested on no novel techniques. See McDonald v. State, No. SC03-648 (Fla. Nov. 2, 2006).

posted by pn at 1:11 PM  

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

Fed. R. Evid. 702: If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.