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

21 N.C. Cent. L.J. 300 (1995)
DNA Profiling in North Carolina

handle is hein.journals/ncclj21 and id is 306 raw text is: DNA PROFILING IN NORTH CAROLINA JAMES MORGAN* I. INTRODUCTION Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) profiling' has been described as the single greatest advance in the search for the truth ... since the ad- vent of cross-examination.2 Others have hailed DNA typing as a method of analysis that could revolutionize law enforcement by identifying criminal suspects with virtual certainty.3 In 1990, the North Carolina courts approved this powerful forensic scientific pro- cedure that can identify a criminal suspect's DNA pattern and can determine whether that person was the source of the blood, semen, hair, or tissue found at the crime scene or on the victim.4 Similarly, the blood, hair, or other bodily fluids of a victim can be matched for identification purposes to the forensic sample on the criminal defend- ant. Most often DNA profile tests are utilized in the more serious, violent crimes where identification is often an issue.5 With these crimes in particular, the victim is often either deceased or the outcome of the prosecution's case rests on the victim's word against that of his or her alleged assailant.6 While prosecutors, law enforcement offi- cials, and some scientists are willing to accept unequivocally the find- * B.S., Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1988; J.D., North Car- olina Central University School of Law, 1994. Mr. Morgan is an Assistant Public Defender for Judicial District 18. 1. DNA profiling has been referred to as DNA typing, DNA fingerprinting, DNA printing, DNA identification, and forensic DNA testing. However, North Carolina courts have most frequently used the terms DNA profiling and DNA testing to denote the DNA profiling process. See State v. Pennington, 327 N.C. 89, 393 S.E.2d 847 (1990) and State v. Bruno, 108 N.C. App. 401, 424 S.E.2d 440, rev. denied, 333 N.C. 464, 428 S.E.2d 185 (1993). 2. People v. Wesley, 533 N.Y.S.2d 643, 644 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1988), aff'd, 589 N.Y.S.2d 197 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992). 3. Debra C. Moss, DNA-The New Fingerprints, A.B.A. J., May 1, 1988, at 66. 4. Caroline M. Kelly, Admissibility of DNA Evidence: Perfecting the Search for Truth, 25 WAKE FoREst L. REV. 591 (1990). State v. Pennington is the seminal case in this area of law in North Carolina and will be discussed in detail in this article. 327 N.C. 89, 393 S.E.2d 847 (1990). 5. Id. 6. Ricardo Fontg, DNA Fingerprinting: A Guide to Admissibility and Use, 57 Mo. L. REV. 501 (1992).

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