.jpg)
Friday, May 01, 2009
Carlson Part Deux, NMCCA Rules on USACIL Problems
Here is a link to NMCCA's day old opinion in United States v. Carlson, No. 200102009, __ M.J. __ (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. Apr. 30, 2009). The opinion addresses lab issues in DNA analysis at the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory (USACIL). The opinion ultimately finds no prejudice due to the strength of the government's case, but other issues are of interest as well and I will leave those to CAAFlog if he wants to take a run at them. This case involves the same errors, and examiner, as were discussed in United States v. Luke, 63 M.J. 60 (C.A.A.F. 2006), opinion here--see our prior coverage here, here, and here (sort of).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Mr. Mills lies only on DNA tests.
The evidence in this case is serological, not DNA.
Mr. Mills did not lie about this test.
Ivo:
No, the evidence was DNA evidence, Mr. Mills just had a limited role in the evidence and testing--limited only to serology and not the actual DNA analysis. DNA was performed by another examiner in this case, though cross-cotamination by Mr. Mills could have affected the accuracy of such tests. NMCAA found they did not.
The Government case in Luke lacks the same merits as articulated by the Court in Carlson. I believe Luke will be more telling of where this USACIL business will ultimately lead.
What happened in Luke? anyone have any insight?
Post a Comment