About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

18 Pepp. L. Rev. 123 (1990-1991)
Admissibility of DNA Genetic Profiling Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: The Case for Caution

handle is hein.journals/pepplr18 and id is 145 raw text is: Admissibility of DNA Genetic Profiling Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: The Case for Caution I. INTRODUCTION Since its debut in a Florida courtroom in 1987,1 DNA fingerprint- ing2 evidence has captured the attention of prosecutors, defense at- torneys and the popular press.3 As the newest method of establishing identity, DNA profiling has been widely touted as the most powerful, most accurate piece of forensic evidence that's ever been created.4 DNA profiling was developed by molecular biologists for use in the genetic research of inherited diseases.5 DNA testing has since been heralded as the answer to legal quandaries ranging from murder to paternity.6 Using minute traces of genetic material extracted from seemingly harmless sources such as a single strand of hair, a speck of dried blood, a drop of saliva, or a semen stain on a bedsheet,7 DNA 1. Andrews. . State, 533 So. 2d 841 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988). Andrews was the first person in the Uhited States to be convicted of a crime with the help of DNA evidence. Lewis, DNA Fingerprints: Witness for the Prosecution, DISCOVER, June 1988, at 44, 52. 2. While DNA testing is often referred to as DNA fingerprinting, this term is disfavored because of its tendency to create unsubstantiated beliefs and expectations in the minds of judges and jurors. Burk, DNA Fingerprinting: Possibilities and Pit- falls of a New Technique, 28 JuIuMETRics J. 455, 468-69 (1988). Therefore, this Com- ment will refer to this technique as either DNA profiling, analysis, or testing. 3. See, e.g., Moss, DNA-The New Fingerprints, A.B.A. J., May 1, 1988, at 66 (not- ing that DNA profiling could revolutionize law enforcement); Lewis, supra note 1, at 52 (DNA typing is the greatest boon to forensic biology since fingerprinting). 4. Williams, Conviction By Chromosome, STUDENT LAW. Dec. 1989, at 26, 29. 5. See White, Lalouel, Lathrop, Leppert, Nakamura & O'Connell, Mapping Ap- proaches to Gene Identification in Humans, 147 W.J. MED. 423, 423 (Oct. 1987) (noting the use of DNA testing to diagnose a predisposition toward inheritable genetic diseases such as sickle-cell anemia, Huntington's Disease, and muscular dystrophy). 6. Burk, supra note 2, at 455. DNA testing is used in establishing parentage. By comparing the DNA prints of the child and the alleged parents, experts can establish family blood lines with unprecedented precision. Thompson & Ford, DNA Typing: Promising Forensic Technique Needs Additional Validation, TRIAL, Sept. 1988, at 56. While the admissibility of DNA testing in civil actions such as paternity cases is also not fully resolved, this Comment confines its examination to the admissibility of DNA testing in criminal cases, where the need for reliability and precision of scientific methods is greatest. 7. Moss, supra note 3, at 66. Urine samples cannot be utilized in the DNA screening process because urine does not contain DNA. Comment, DNA Identification Tests and the Courts, 63 WASH. L. REv. 903, 909 n.27 (1988).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most