Tuesday, June 11, 2013

Criminal Lawyers Distressed Over Unwarranted DNA Tests

Criminal lawyers are going to have to make very strategic moves in defending their clients. This month, the Supreme Court ruled on Maryland v. King allowing police to take an unwarranted DNA swab from someone suspected for having committed a violent felony or burglary. The court reasoned that taking a DNA swab is similar from taking a person's fingerprint in that both uniquely identify a person.

Motions to Exclude Latent Fingerprint Testimony are sometimes used by criminal lawyers. Expert criminal lawyers know that fingerprint misidentification does occur.  Criminal lawyers also know that errors can occur in collecting the fingerprints and the handling of evidence containing fingerprints. Criminal lawyers should also consider the Irick rule, State v. Irick, when the only evidence that exists is a fingerprint. Fingerprint evidence is used mostly in cases involving violent crimes and sex crimes.

No comments :

Post a Comment