DNA tests for prisoners not a constitutional right

[Silverback]

Reporting from Washington -- The Supreme Court said today that DNA possesses a unique ability to free the innocent and convict the guilty, but the justices nonetheless ruled that prisoners do not have a constitutional right to demand DNA testing of evidence that remains in police files.

In a 5-4 ruling, the court's conservative bloc agreed to stand back and allow states to work out the rules for new testing of old crime samples.

Already, 47 states and the federal government have enacted laws or rules that allow prisoners under some circumstances to obtain DNA tests, the high court said.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said the majority saw no need for "a freestanding and far-reaching constitutional right of access to this type of evidence." Upholding such a new right "would take the development of rules and procedures in this area of out of the hands of legislatures and state courts shaping policy in a focused manner and turn it over to federal courts," he said.

Full Story

[Silverback]

Let's say all the states sign up and provide for DNA testing. Once the Convicted criminal provides a sample, would that act require the state to have a comparison sample from the crime? Thereby shifting the burden of proof back to the state, resulting in dismissed convictions due to a lack of DNA evidence from old cases?

[RangerX]

Let's say all the states sign up and provide for DNA testing. Once the Convicted criminal provides a sample, would that act require the state to have a comparison sample from the crime? Thereby shifting the burden of proof back to the state, resulting in dismissed convictions due to a lack of DNA evidence from old cases?

Interesting concept. I suspect that if DNA were used in the original conviction, then sure, although the convict would not get far if that were the case as the DNA would probably still match. If DNA were never used in the original case, then they might have grounds for a retrial, but I doubt it. Think of it this way, if fingerprints were not part of the original evidence set, but there was photographic evidence of the convict committing the crime, 100s of eye witnesses, etc. then they probably wouldn't have much luck in overturning the conviction based on lack of fingerprints.

[Silverback]

Let's say all the states sign up and provide for DNA testing. Once the Convicted criminal provides a sample, would that act require the state to have a comparison sample from the crime? Thereby shifting the burden of proof back to the state, resulting in dismissed convictions due to a lack of DNA evidence from old cases?

Interesting concept. I suspect that if DNA were used in the original conviction, then sure, although the convict would not get far if that were the case as the DNA would probably still match. If DNA were never used in the original case, then they might have grounds for a retrial, but I doubt it. Think of it this way, if fingerprints were not part of the original evidence set, but there was photographic evidence of the convict committing the crime, 100s of eye witnesses, etc. then they probably wouldn't have much luck in overturning the conviction based on lack of fingerprints.

Good point, sometimes I think way too much!

[RangerX]

Let's say all the states sign up and provide for DNA testing. Once the Convicted criminal provides a sample, would that act require the state to have a comparison sample from the crime? Thereby shifting the burden of proof back to the state, resulting in dismissed convictions due to a lack of DNA evidence from old cases?

Interesting concept. I suspect that if DNA were used in the original conviction, then sure, although the convict would not get far if that were the case as the DNA would probably still match. If DNA were never used in the original case, then they might have grounds for a retrial, but I doubt it. Think of it this way, if fingerprints were not part of the original evidence set, but there was photographic evidence of the convict committing the crime, 100s of eye witnesses, etc. then they probably wouldn't have much luck in overturning the conviction based on lack of fingerprints.

Good point, sometimes I think way too much!

Beats the alternative. Look at the voter base.

[Flesh Thorn]

Let's say all the states sign up and provide for DNA testing. Once the Convicted criminal provides a sample, would that act require the state to have a comparison sample from the crime? Thereby shifting the burden of proof back to the state, resulting in dismissed convictions due to a lack of DNA evidence from old cases?

justices nonetheless ruled that prisoners do not have a constitutional right to demand DNA testing of evidence that remains in police files.

The way I read it is that it concerns evidence already in existence.

[Silverback]

LA County Sheriff says DNA backlog search stopped

LOS ANGELES - The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department has suspended efforts to analyze a decades-long backlog of DNA evidence from thousands of rape and sexual assault cases, blaming a lack of cash and staff.

Sheriff Lee Baca told the county's Board of Supervisors in a report issued last week the department had stopped shipping the evidence to crime laboratories at the end of May.

Baca said the department is counting on federal grant money expected next month for another four or five more months of testing, but only an uncertain stream of state money will follow that.

Sheriff's officials said Monday that Marshall University in West Virginia would perform a small number of tests for free each month.

The report said the department has sent evidence from 676 cases to outside labs since the new efforts to clear the backlog began. Most of those were only sent recently and had yet to be tested.

In November, it was revealed that more than 4,000 sexual assault kits sat untested in county storage, many from smaller police agencies that rely on the Sheriff's Department for lab work. Sheriff's officials downplayed that number, suggesting that most of the cases had been resolved or pursued by other means.

They had previously tested DNA evidence only when case investigators asked, but Baca and Los Angeles police chief William Bratton said in November that all such cases would have DNA evidence tested.

Full Story

[rgrokelley]

LA County Sheriff says DNA backlog search stopped

LOS ANGELES - The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department has suspended efforts to analyze a decades-long backlog of DNA evidence from thousands of rape and sexual assault cases, blaming a lack of cash and staff.

Sheriff Lee Baca told the county's Board of Supervisors in a report issued last week the department had stopped shipping the evidence to crime laboratories at the end of May.

Baca said the department is counting on federal grant money expected next month for another four or five more months of testing, but only an uncertain stream of state money will follow that.

Sheriff's officials said Monday that Marshall University in West Virginia would perform a small number of tests for free each month.

The report said the department has sent evidence from 676 cases to outside labs since the new efforts to clear the backlog began. Most of those were only sent recently and had yet to be tested.

In November, it was revealed that more than 4,000 sexual assault kits sat untested in county storage, many from smaller police agencies that rely on the Sheriff's Department for lab work. Sheriff's officials downplayed that number, suggesting that most of the cases had been resolved or pursued by other means.

They had previously tested DNA evidence only when case investigators asked, but Baca and Los Angeles police chief William Bratton said in November that all such cases would have DNA evidence tested.

Full Story

CSI can do it in less than an hour... with commercials

[Silverback]

LA County Sheriff says DNA backlog search stopped

LOS ANGELES - The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department has suspended efforts to analyze a decades-long backlog of DNA evidence from thousands of rape and sexual assault cases, blaming a lack of cash and staff.

Sheriff Lee Baca told the county's Board of Supervisors in a report issued last week the department had stopped shipping the evidence to crime laboratories at the end of May.

Baca said the department is counting on federal grant money expected next month for another four or five more months of testing, but only an uncertain stream of state money will follow that.

Sheriff's officials said Monday that Marshall University in West Virginia would perform a small number of tests for free each month.

The report said the department has sent evidence from 676 cases to outside labs since the new efforts to clear the backlog began. Most of those were only sent recently and had yet to be tested.

In November, it was revealed that more than 4,000 sexual assault kits sat untested in county storage, many from smaller police agencies that rely on the Sheriff's Department for lab work. Sheriff's officials downplayed that number, suggesting that most of the cases had been resolved or pursued by other means.

They had previously tested DNA evidence only when case investigators asked, but Baca and Los Angeles police chief William Bratton said in November that all such cases would have DNA evidence tested.

Full Story

CSI can do it in less than an hour... with commercials

Amazing isn't it?? DNA is awesome, but I think we are just beginning to see the effects it will have on previous convictions and the burden it puts on resourcing investigation and reinvestigation.

[Bugsy]

It will certainly become a burden, BUT there have been far too many individuals who have been convicted of serious crimes that were later found to be innocent as a direct result of DNA evidence that proved they were not the person responsible. In the same vein there have been people who were FOUND to be innocent that may not have been and later convicted as a result of DNA evidence. I'm in favor of manditory testing, I'm also in favor of a persons right to request a DNA test to prove their innocence ONLY if as a direct result of that evidence it would prove that inmate was wrongly convicted.

I think President Obama should have another TV news conference explaining how he's gonna do something about it..........(and then have another one, and another one and another one..... day after day after day....)

[boscounderfoot]

It will certainly become a burden, BUT there have been far too many individuals who have been convicted of serious crimes that were later found to be innocent as a direct result of DNA evidence that proved they were not the person responsible. In the same vein there have been people who were FOUND to be innocent that may not have been and later convicted as a result of DNA evidence. I'm in favor of manditory testing, I'm also in favor of a persons right to request a DNA test to prove their innocence ONLY if as a direct result of that evidence it would prove that inmate was wrongly convicted.

I think President Obama should have another TV news conference explaining how he's gonna do something about it..........(and then have another one, and another one and another one..... day after day after day....)

Well said!! I think you have to feel for that poor bastard sitting in a cell somewhere for something he didn't do. He finds out that there is DNA evidence that could exonerate him and he's told they won't test him to confirm it. On the conviction end of it, some scumbag rapist gets popped and the test implicates him in several other assaults, we've just solved a few cases. Let's face it, the technology is there, use it. Yeah it's expensive but it's worth it if it helps to resolve cases and ensure correct verdicts in the future.

[Silverback]

I think President Obama should have another TV news conference explaining how he's gonna do something about it..........(and then have another one, and another one and another one..... day after day after day....)

Bugsy,
I get the feeling that right now...you feel like a guy that picked up the hottest chick at the bar. You're at her place she did some bad stuff to you and...while she taking of her skirt she has to untape her friend...


One night stands can turn out as bad as a well intentioned but ill cast ballot.