11 California opinions name it 2 courts 1991–2026 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Axellgreen2 sentences2026At the time of the trial court’s ruling, three California appellate decisions — Venegas, supra, 18 Cal.4th 47 , People v. Barney (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 798 , and People v. Axell (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 836 (Axell) — had confirmed the general scientific acceptance of RFLP analysis. 2001Rather, the test is met if use of the technique is supported by a clear majority of the members of that community.’ ” (Leahy, supra, 8 Cal.4th at p. 612 , quoting People v. Guerra, supra, 37 Cal.3d at p. 418 , italics added by Leahy , see also People v. Axell, supra, 235 Cal.App.3d at p. 860 [“[T]he defense witnesses’ testimony on the issue of general acceptance did not undermine the validity of the trial court’s determination that forensic use of RFLP analysis is generally accepted in the relevant scientific community.”].) 14 Appellant complains the trial court could not have found that use o | 1 | 4 |
People v. Barneygreen2 sentences2026At the time of the trial court’s ruling, three California appellate decisions — Venegas, supra, 18 Cal.4th 47 , People v. Barney (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 798 , and People v. Axell (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 836 (Axell) — had confirmed the general scientific acceptance of RFLP analysis. 2007We explained: "`There are three discrete steps in [RFLP] analysis ...:(1) processing of DNA from the suspect and the crime scene to produce X-ray films [autorads] which indicate the lengths of the polymorphic fragments; (2) examination of the [autorads] to determine whether any sets of fragments match; and (3) if there is a match, determination of the match's statistical significance. " ( Id. at p. 60, 74 Cal.Rptr.2d 262 , 954 P.2d 525 , quoting People v. Barney (1992) 8 Cal. App.4th 798, 806 , 10 Cal.Rptr.2d 731 .) As we further explained the first step of RFLP analysis processing DNA sampl | 1 | 4 |
People v. Sotogreen2 sentences2026In 1989 and 1992, the FBI DNA analysis unit chief, Lawrence Presley, supervised testing of the DOJ samples using restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis.3 3 RFLP analysis “compar[es] the DNA in a known sample (e.g., blood from a suspect) with the DNA in a questioned sample (e.g., blood or semen taken from a crime scene).” (People v. Soto (1999) 21 Cal.4th 512 , 514–515 (Soto).) RFLP analysis involves (1) processing DNA from the suspect(s) and the crime scene to produce X-ray films that indicate the lengths of the polymorphic base pairs (e.g., the sequence of base pairs that va 2003We determined that calculations made under the modified ceiling approach which modifies the product rule [5] in such a way as to select random match probability figures most favorable to the accused from the scientifically based range of probabilities qualify for admission under the Kelly test. [6] ( Venegas, supra, 18 Cal.4th at pp. 84-90, [ 74 Cal.Rptr.2d 262 , 954 P.2d 525 ].)" ( People v. Soto (1999) 21 Cal.4th 512, 514-515 , 88 Cal.Rptr.2d 34 , 981 P.2d 958 (Soto) .) In this case, in ruling on the question whether the prosecution had carried its burden under Kelly, supra, 17 Cal.3d at | 1 | 3 |
People v. Bolingreen2 sentences2003(See People v. Bolin (1998) 18 Cal.4th 297, 334 , 75 Cal.Rptr.2d 412 , 956 P.2d 374 [whether to call certain witnesses is a matter of trial tactics, unless the decision results from unreasonable failure to investigate].) The remaining arguments defendant makes with regard to the Kelly question also lack merit. 2003(See People v. Bolin (1998) 18 Cal.4th 297, 334 , 75 Cal.Rptr.2d 412 , 956 P.2d 374 [whether to call certain witnesses is a matter of trial tactics, unless the decision results from unreasonable failure to investigate].) The remaining arguments defendant makes with regard to the Kelly question also lack merit. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Ashmusgreen2 sentences2001(Id. at pp. 91, 93; People v. Ashmus (1991) 54 Cal.3d 932, 971 [ 2 Cal.Rptr.2d 112 , 820 P.2d 214 ].) Although the trial court here made no express ruling on the fixed bin issue, a finding in the prosecution’s favor is fairly implied from the court’s determination that “no evidence was produced to show that there was any departure from the generally accepted procedures in the scientific community . . . .” Raising a similar argument to the one he presented against floating bins in Venegas, supra, 18 Cal.4th at pages 90-91, defense expert Mueller testified that the DOJ uses improperly sized fixe 2001(Id. at pp. 91, 93; People v. Ashmus (1991) 54 Cal.3d 932, 971 [ 2 Cal.Rptr.2d 112 , 820 P.2d 214 ].) Although the trial court here made no express ruling on the fixed bin issue, a finding in the prosecution’s favor is fairly implied from the court’s determination that “no evidence was produced to show that there was any departure from the generally accepted procedures in the scientific community . . . .” Raising a similar argument to the one he presented against floating bins in Venegas, supra, 18 Cal.4th at pages 90-91, defense expert Mueller testified that the DOJ uses improperly sized fixe | 1 | 1 |
People v. Smithgreen2 sentences1998(People v. Smith (1989) 215 Cal.App.3d 19, 27 [ 263 Cal.Rptr. 678 ]; People v. Reilly (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 1127, 1153-1155 [ 242 Cal.Rptr. 496 ].) FBI Agent Audrey Lynch, who took charge of the RFLP analysis in the present case, clearly had the latter qualifications and was properly permitted to testify as to the correctness of the scientific procedures followed by the FBI in conducting that analysis. 1998(People v. Smith (1989) 215 Cal.App.3d 19, 27 [ 263 Cal.Rptr. 678 ]; People v. Reilly (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 1127, 1153-1155 [ 242 Cal.Rptr. 496 ].) FBI Agent Audrey Lynch, who took charge of the RFLP analysis in the present case, clearly had the latter qualifications and was properly permitted to testify as to the correctness of the scientific procedures followed by the FBI in conducting that analysis. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Reillygreen2 sentences1998(People v. Smith (1989) 215 Cal.App.3d 19, 27 [ 263 Cal.Rptr. 678 ]; People v. Reilly (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 1127, 1153-1155 [ 242 Cal.Rptr. 496 ].) FBI Agent Audrey Lynch, who took charge of the RFLP analysis in the present case, clearly had the latter qualifications and was properly permitted to testify as to the correctness of the scientific procedures followed by the FBI in conducting that analysis. 1998(People v. Smith (1989) 215 Cal.App.3d 19, 27 [ 263 Cal.Rptr. 678 ]; People v. Reilly (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 1127, 1153-1155 [ 242 Cal.Rptr. 496 ].) FBI Agent Audrey Lynch, who took charge of the RFLP analysis in the present case, clearly had the latter qualifications and was properly permitted to testify as to the correctness of the scientific procedures followed by the FBI in conducting that analysis. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Taylorgreen2 sentences1998(Id. at p. 809.) In concluding such statistical methodology was not generally accepted at the time Barney was decided, the court cited the competing articles in the December 1991 issue of Science magazine regarding the possible effect of population substructuring on calculation of probability estimates under the unmodified product rule. (8 Cal.App.4th at pp. 802, 814-822; accord, People v. Wallace (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 651, 657-660 [ 17 Cal.Rptr.2d 721 ] [authored by the Barney court].) However, the Barney court indicated the “ceiling frequency” or “modified ceiling” approaches proposed by the 1998(Id. at p. 809.) In concluding such statistical methodology was not generally accepted at the time Barney was decided, the court cited the competing articles in the December 1991 issue of Science magazine regarding the possible effect of population substructuring on calculation of probability estimates under the unmodified product rule. (8 Cal.App.4th at pp. 802, 814-822; accord, People v. Wallace (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 651, 657-660 [ 17 Cal.Rptr.2d 721 ] [authored by the Barney court].) However, the Barney court indicated the “ceiling frequency” or “modified ceiling” approaches proposed by the | 1 | 1 |
People v. Wallacegreen2 sentences1998(Id. at p. 809.) In concluding such statistical methodology was not generally accepted at the time Barney was decided, the court cited the competing articles in the December 1991 issue of Science magazine regarding the possible effect of population substructuring on calculation of probability estimates under the unmodified product rule. (8 Cal.App.4th at pp. 802, 814-822; accord, People v. Wallace (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 651, 657-660 [ 17 Cal.Rptr.2d 721 ] [authored by the Barney court].) However, the Barney court indicated the “ceiling frequency” or “modified ceiling” approaches proposed by the 1998(Id. at p. 809.) In concluding such statistical methodology was not generally accepted at the time Barney was decided, the court cited the competing articles in the December 1991 issue of Science magazine regarding the possible effect of population substructuring on calculation of probability estimates under the unmodified product rule. (8 Cal.App.4th at pp. 802, 814-822; accord, People v. Wallace (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 651, 657-660 [ 17 Cal.Rptr.2d 721 ] [authored by the Barney court].) However, the Barney court indicated the “ceiling frequency” or “modified ceiling” approaches proposed by the | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Roland Addison, United States of America v. Albert Henry Raymondgreen1 sentence1998Cir. 1974) 498 F.2d 741, 744 [ 162 App.D.C. 199 ].)” { Barney, supra, 8 Cal.App.4th at pp. 817-818.) The statistical calculation phase of RFLP analysis therefore requires Kelly/Frye screening of evidence on statistical probabilities of random matches at VNTR loci to assure that (1) the methodology used is generally accepted in the scientific community, and (2) the calculations in the particular case followed correct scientific procedures. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Colemangreen2 sentences1998(See, e.g., People v. Coleman (1988) 46 Cal.3d 749, 760 [ 251 Cal.Rptr. 83 , 759 P.2d 1260 ] [expert testified that one body fluid characteristic occurred in 20 percent of the general population, a second characteristic in 40 percent, and a combination of the two in 8 percent; and that “these are established statistical frequencies, not projected possibilities”].) Not only the frequencies of those individual characteristics but also their independence for purposes of applying the product rule has been established. 1998(See, e.g., People v. Coleman (1988) 46 Cal.3d 749, 760 [ 251 Cal.Rptr. 83 , 759 P.2d 1260 ] [expert testified that one body fluid characteristic occurred in 20 percent of the general population, a second characteristic in 40 percent, and a combination of the two in 8 percent; and that “these are established statistical frequencies, not projected possibilities”].) Not only the frequencies of those individual characteristics but also their independence for purposes of applying the product rule has been established. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Jonesgreen1 sentence1998Thus, that committee’s conclusion regarding the reliability of forensic DNA typing, specifically RFLP analysis, and the proffer of a conservative method for calculating probability estimates can easily be equated with general acceptance of those methodologies in the relevant scientific community.’ United States v. Porter, 618 A.2d 629 , 643 n. 26 (D.C.App.1992) [citations].” (State v. Johnson, supra, 922 P.2d at p. 299.) Based on our review of the NRC reports, legal commentaries, scientific literature, and consideration and acceptance of the modified ceiling method in the published decisions o | 1 | 1 |
State v. Johnsongreen1 sentence1998Thus, that committee’s conclusion regarding the reliability of forensic DNA typing, specifically RFLP analysis, and the proffer of a conservative method for calculating probability estimates can easily be equated with general acceptance of those methodologies in the relevant scientific community.’ United States v. Porter, 618 A.2d 629 , 643 n. 26 (D.C.App.1992) [citations].” (State v. Johnson, supra, 922 P.2d at p. 299.) Based on our review of the NRC reports, legal commentaries, scientific literature, and consideration and acceptance of the modified ceiling method in the published decisions o | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Castrogreen | 1 | 1 |
| Cobey v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Venegas
green
2 sentences2026At the time of the trial court’s ruling, three California appellate decisions — Venegas, supra, 18 Cal.4th 47 , People v. Barney (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 798 , and People v. Axell (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 836 (Axell) — had confirmed the general scientific acceptance of RFLP analysis. 2026At the time of the trial court’s ruling, three California appellate decisions — Venegas, supra, 18 Cal.4th 47 , People v. Barney (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 798 , and People v. Axell (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 836 (Axell) — had confirmed the general scientific acceptance of RFLP analysis. | 5 | 2001–2026 |
People v. Kelly
red
2 sentences2003We determined that calculations made under the modified ceiling approach which modifies the product rule [5] in such a way as to select random match probability figures most favorable to the accused from the scientifically based range of probabilities qualify for admission under the Kelly test. [6] ( Venegas, supra, 18 Cal.4th at pp. 84-90, [ 74 Cal.Rptr.2d 262 , 954 P.2d 525 ].)" ( People v. Soto (1999) 21 Cal.4th 512, 514-515 , 88 Cal.Rptr.2d 34 , 981 P.2d 958 (Soto) .) In this case, in ruling on the question whether the prosecution had carried its burden under Kelly, supra, 17 Cal.3d at 2003We determined that calculations made under the modified ceiling approach which modifies the product rule [5] in such a way as to select random match probability figures most favorable to the accused from the scientifically based range of probabilities qualify for admission under the Kelly test. [6] ( Venegas, supra, 18 Cal.4th at pp. 84-90, [ 74 Cal.Rptr.2d 262 , 954 P.2d 525 ].)" ( People v. Soto (1999) 21 Cal.4th 512, 514-515 , 88 Cal.Rptr.2d 34 , 981 P.2d 958 (Soto) .) In this case, in ruling on the question whether the prosecution had carried its burden under Kelly, supra, 17 Cal.3d at | 4 | 1992–2003 |
People v. Pizarro
green
2 sentences2013(Pizarro II, supra, 110 Cal.App.4th at p. 562 .) For example, in 1989, in preparation for the first trial, the samples in this case were tested using RFLP analysis. 2013(Pizarro II, supra, 110 Cal.App.4th at p. 562 .) For example, in 1989, in preparation for the first trial, the samples in this case were tested using RFLP analysis. | 2 | 2013–2013 |
People v. Campos
green
2 sentences2007What is important for purposes of defendant's present claim is that Paula Yates, a biologist with Cellmark, rather than Dr. Cotton, performed the laboratory work required for completing the first step. [12] We do not hold that simply because a document qualifies as a business record that it is necessarily nontestimonial since conceivably some such document could contain historical facts. [13] Defendant also argues that the admission of Dr. Cotton's testimony was state law error because it was tantamount to the testimony by one expert as to the opinion of another. ( People v. Campos (1995) 32 C 2007What is important for purposes of defendant's present claim is that Paula Yates, a biologist with Cellmark, rather than Dr. Cotton, performed the laboratory work required for completing the first step. [12] We do not hold that simply because a document qualifies as a business record that it is necessarily nontestimonial since conceivably some such document could contain historical facts. [13] Defendant also argues that the admission of Dr. Cotton's testimony was state law error because it was tantamount to the testimony by one expert as to the opinion of another. ( People v. Campos (1995) 32 C | 1 | 2007–2007 |
People v. Guerra
green
1 sentence2001Rather, the test is met if use of the technique is supported by a clear majority of the members of that community.’ ” (Leahy, supra, 8 Cal.4th at p. 612 , quoting People v. Guerra, supra, 37 Cal.3d at p. 418 , italics added by Leahy , see also People v. Axell, supra, 235 Cal.App.3d at p. 860 [“[T]he defense witnesses’ testimony on the issue of general acceptance did not undermine the validity of the trial court’s determination that forensic use of RFLP analysis is generally accepted in the relevant scientific community.”].) 14 Appellant complains the trial court could not have found that use o | 1 | 2001–2001 |
People v. Leahy
green
1 sentence2001Rather, the test is met if use of the technique is supported by a clear majority of the members of that community.’ ” (Leahy, supra, 8 Cal.4th at p. 612 , quoting People v. Guerra, supra, 37 Cal.3d at p. 418 , italics added by Leahy , see also People v. Axell, supra, 235 Cal.App.3d at p. 860 [“[T]he defense witnesses’ testimony on the issue of general acceptance did not undermine the validity of the trial court’s determination that forensic use of RFLP analysis is generally accepted in the relevant scientific community.”].) 14 Appellant complains the trial court could not have found that use o | 1 | 2001–2001 |
United States v. Porter
green
1 sentence1998Thus, that committee’s conclusion regarding the reliability of forensic DNA typing, specifically RFLP analysis, and the proffer of a conservative method for calculating probability estimates can easily be equated with general acceptance of those methodologies in the relevant scientific community.’ United States v. Porter, 618 A.2d 629 , 643 n. 26 (D.C.App.1992) [citations].” (State v. Johnson, supra, 922 P.2d at p. 299.) Based on our review of the NRC reports, legal commentaries, scientific literature, and consideration and acceptance of the modified ceiling method in the published decisions o | 1 | 1998–1998 |
People v. Cooper
green
1 sentence1992They, in effect, argue that under Farmer and People v. Cooper, supra, 53 Cal.3d 771, 814 , while a particular scientific technique might be validated under Kelly/Frye, the question of whether the evidence in the particular case was properly tested according to that technique is a separate non -Kelly/Frye issue that goes to weight. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
United States v. Jakobetz
green
2 sentences1991Thus, the defense witnesses’ testimony on the issue of general acceptance did not undermine the validity of the trial court’s determination that forensic use of RFLP analysis is generally accepted in the relevant scientific community. “ ‘A determination of reliability cannot rest solely on a process of “counting (scientific) noses” ’ ” (U.S. v. Jakobetz, supra, 747 F.Supp. 250, 254 .) c. 1991Thus, the defense witnesses’ testimony on the issue of general acceptance did not undermine the validity of the trial court’s determination that forensic use of RFLP analysis is generally accepted in the relevant scientific community. “ ‘A determination of reliability cannot rest solely on a process of “counting (scientific) noses” ’ ” (U.S. v. Jakobetz, supra, 747 F.Supp. 250, 254 .) c. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
United States v. Young
green
1 sentence1991(State v. Brown (Iowa 1991) 470 N.W.2d 30 .) 7 Courts that have found forensic DNA typing using RFLP analysis generally accepted in the scientific community include Cobey v. State, supra, 559 A.2d 391, 398 (Cellmark); People v. Castro, supra, 545 N.Y.S.2d 985, 999 (evidence excluded because of improper procedures used by Lifecodes); People v. Wesley, supra, 533 N.Y.S.2d 643, 659 ; Andrews v. State, supra, 533 So.2d at 850-851 ; Spencer v. Com., supra, 384 S.E.2d 775 , 783 & fn. 10; U.S. v. Young (D.S.D. 1990) 754 F.Supp. 739 (Cellmark); State v. Ford (1990) 301 S.C. 485 [ 392 S.E.2d 781 ] (adm | 1 | 1991–1991 |
People v. Wesley
green
1 sentence1991(State v. Brown (Iowa 1991) 470 N.W.2d 30 .) 7 Courts that have found forensic DNA typing using RFLP analysis generally accepted in the scientific community include Cobey v. State, supra, 559 A.2d 391, 398 (Cellmark); People v. Castro, supra, 545 N.Y.S.2d 985, 999 (evidence excluded because of improper procedures used by Lifecodes); People v. Wesley, supra, 533 N.Y.S.2d 643, 659 ; Andrews v. State, supra, 533 So.2d at 850-851 ; Spencer v. Com., supra, 384 S.E.2d 775 , 783 & fn. 10; U.S. v. Young (D.S.D. 1990) 754 F.Supp. 739 (Cellmark); State v. Ford (1990) 301 S.C. 485 [ 392 S.E.2d 781 ] (adm | 1 | 1991–1991 |
State v. Brown
green
1 sentence1991(State v. Brown (Iowa 1991) 470 N.W.2d 30 .) 7 Courts that have found forensic DNA typing using RFLP analysis generally accepted in the scientific community include Cobey v. State, supra, 559 A.2d 391, 398 (Cellmark); People v. Castro, supra, 545 N.Y.S.2d 985, 999 (evidence excluded because of improper procedures used by Lifecodes); People v. Wesley, supra, 533 N.Y.S.2d 643, 659 ; Andrews v. State, supra, 533 So.2d at 850-851 ; Spencer v. Com., supra, 384 S.E.2d 775 , 783 & fn. 10; U.S. v. Young (D.S.D. 1990) 754 F.Supp. 739 (Cellmark); State v. Ford (1990) 301 S.C. 485 [ 392 S.E.2d 781 ] (adm | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| State v. Pennington green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Caldwell v. State green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Andrews v. State green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Kelly v. State green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
State v. Pennell
green
2 sentences1991(State v. Brown (Iowa 1991) 470 N.W.2d 30 .) 7 Courts that have found forensic DNA typing using RFLP analysis generally accepted in the scientific community include Cobey v. State, supra, 559 A.2d 391, 398 (Cellmark); People v. Castro, supra, 545 N.Y.S.2d 985, 999 (evidence excluded because of improper procedures used by Lifecodes); People v. Wesley, supra, 533 N.Y.S.2d 643, 659 ; Andrews v. State, supra, 533 So.2d at 850-851 ; Spencer v. Com., supra, 384 S.E.2d 775 , 783 & fn. 10; U.S. v. Young (D.S.D. 1990) 754 F.Supp. 739 (Cellmark); State v. Ford (1990) 301 S.C. 485 [ 392 S.E.2d 781 ] (adm 1991(State v. Brown (Iowa 1991) 470 N.W.2d 30 .) 7 Courts that have found forensic DNA typing using RFLP analysis generally accepted in the scientific community include Cobey v. State, supra, 559 A.2d 391, 398 (Cellmark); People v. Castro, supra, 545 N.Y.S.2d 985, 999 (evidence excluded because of improper procedures used by Lifecodes); People v. Wesley, supra, 533 N.Y.S.2d 643, 659 ; Andrews v. State, supra, 533 So.2d at 850-851 ; Spencer v. Com., supra, 384 S.E.2d 775 , 783 & fn. 10; U.S. v. Young (D.S.D. 1990) 754 F.Supp. 739 (Cellmark); State v. Ford (1990) 301 S.C. 485 [ 392 S.E.2d 781 ] (adm | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Glover v. State
green
1 sentence1991(State v. Brown (Iowa 1991) 470 N.W.2d 30 .) 7 Courts that have found forensic DNA typing using RFLP analysis generally accepted in the scientific community include Cobey v. State, supra, 559 A.2d 391, 398 (Cellmark); People v. Castro, supra, 545 N.Y.S.2d 985, 999 (evidence excluded because of improper procedures used by Lifecodes); People v. Wesley, supra, 533 N.Y.S.2d 643, 659 ; Andrews v. State, supra, 533 So.2d at 850-851 ; Spencer v. Com., supra, 384 S.E.2d 775 , 783 & fn. 10; U.S. v. Young (D.S.D. 1990) 754 F.Supp. 739 (Cellmark); State v. Ford (1990) 301 S.C. 485 [ 392 S.E.2d 781 ] (adm | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Martinez v. State
green
1 sentence1991(State v. Brown (Iowa 1991) 470 N.W.2d 30 .) 7 Courts that have found forensic DNA typing using RFLP analysis generally accepted in the scientific community include Cobey v. State, supra, 559 A.2d 391, 398 (Cellmark); People v. Castro, supra, 545 N.Y.S.2d 985, 999 (evidence excluded because of improper procedures used by Lifecodes); People v. Wesley, supra, 533 N.Y.S.2d 643, 659 ; Andrews v. State, supra, 533 So.2d at 850-851 ; Spencer v. Com., supra, 384 S.E.2d 775 , 783 & fn. 10; U.S. v. Young (D.S.D. 1990) 754 F.Supp. 739 (Cellmark); State v. Ford (1990) 301 S.C. 485 [ 392 S.E.2d 781 ] (adm | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Spencer v. Commonwealth
green
1 sentence1991(State v. Brown (Iowa 1991) 470 N.W.2d 30 .) 7 Courts that have found forensic DNA typing using RFLP analysis generally accepted in the scientific community include Cobey v. State, supra, 559 A.2d 391, 398 (Cellmark); People v. Castro, supra, 545 N.Y.S.2d 985, 999 (evidence excluded because of improper procedures used by Lifecodes); People v. Wesley, supra, 533 N.Y.S.2d 643, 659 ; Andrews v. State, supra, 533 So.2d at 850-851 ; Spencer v. Com., supra, 384 S.E.2d 775 , 783 & fn. 10; U.S. v. Young (D.S.D. 1990) 754 F.Supp. 739 (Cellmark); State v. Ford (1990) 301 S.C. 485 [ 392 S.E.2d 781 ] (adm | 1 | 1991–1991 |
State v. Woodall
green
1 sentence1991(State v. Brown (Iowa 1991) 470 N.W.2d 30 .) 7 Courts that have found forensic DNA typing using RFLP analysis generally accepted in the scientific community include Cobey v. State, supra, 559 A.2d 391, 398 (Cellmark); People v. Castro, supra, 545 N.Y.S.2d 985, 999 (evidence excluded because of improper procedures used by Lifecodes); People v. Wesley, supra, 533 N.Y.S.2d 643, 659 ; Andrews v. State, supra, 533 So.2d at 850-851 ; Spencer v. Com., supra, 384 S.E.2d 775 , 783 & fn. 10; U.S. v. Young (D.S.D. 1990) 754 F.Supp. 739 (Cellmark); State v. Ford (1990) 301 S.C. 485 [ 392 S.E.2d 781 ] (adm | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| State v. Ford green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.