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

51 S. Cal. L. Rev. 309 (1977-1978)
The Admissibility of Bite Mark Evidence

handle is hein.journals/scal51 and id is 325 raw text is: The Admissibility of Bite Mark Evidence Bite mark analysis seeks to identify persons by comparison of their denti- tion1 to a bite registration in flesh or other material.2 The technique is a specialized subset of forensic odontology, the application of dentistry to law.3 Bite mark comparisons may be offered to prove the identity of an assailant in a criminal trial.4 This Note explores the current state of the art of bite mark analysis and reviews California judicial treatment of the admissibility of scientific evi- dence in general and of bite mark evidence in particular. It argues that admission of bite mark evidence may result in the use of irrelevant, prejudi- cial evidence by the trier of fact. In addition, it argues that the subjective nature of bite mark evidence further hampers the jury in assessing the weight to be accorded that evidence. The Note proposes that admissibility of bite mark evidence be barred pending the establishment of standards of admissi- bility by a committee of forensic odontologists. 1. Dentition is the kind, number, and arrangement of the teeth. L. LuNTz & P. LuNTz, HANDBOOK FOR DENTAL IDENTIFICATION 186 (1973). 2. G. GUSTAFSON, FORENSIC ODONTOLOGY 140 (1966). 3. I. SOPHER, FORENSIC DENTISTRY 3 (1976). The term forensic odontology is synony- mous with forensic dentistry. Id. The major fields comprising forensic odontology are as follows: (1) dental identification of bodies of victims of crime or disaster; (2) bite mark comparison; (3) trauma and oral injury, including, for example, expert testimony in a personal injury case; and (4) dental malpractice. Id. at 3-4. The field of identification of human remains is the most highly developed of the four areas of interest. When a body is decomposed or mutilated, dental identification may be the only method yielding results. Identification of a body is important for estate and insurance settle- ment, remarriage, and homicide prosecution. L. LuNTz & P. LuLNTZ, supra note 1, at xiii. See generally Vale & Noguchi, The Role of the Forensic Dentist in Mass Disasters, 21 DENTAL CLINICS N. AM. 123 (1977); Vale, Noguchi, & Peck, Dental Investigation of the 1974 SLA Shootout, CAL. DENTAL A.J., May 1975, at 35. For a historical overview of this field, see id. at 1-15. 4. See People v. Marx, 54 Cal. App. 3d 100, 126 Cal. Rptr. 350 (1975); People v. Milone, 43 Ill. App. 3d 385, 356 N.E.2d 1350 (1976); People v. Johnson, 8 M1. App. 3d 457, 289 N.E.2d 722 (1972); Patterson v. State of Texas, 509 S.W.2d 857 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Doyle v. State, 159 Tex. Crim. 310, 263 S.W.2d 779 (1954). This Note is confined to the criminal context, in which the evidentiary arguments against admissibility are sharply drawn. See text accompanying notes 55-69 infra.

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