• About
  • Blog
  • Forensic Disciplines
    • Foundations of Forensics
    • Arson
    • Bite Mark
    • Blood & Bodily Fluids
    • Child Abuse Allegations
    • Crime Scene Investigation
    • Death Investigation
    • Detection Dogs
    • Digital Evidence
    • DNA
    • Drug Analysis
    • Drug Recognition Experts
    • Eyewitness ID
    • Fingerprints
    • Firearms
    • Forensic/Sexual Assault Exams
    • Measurement Uncertainty
    • Mental Health
    • Toxicology
    • Trace Evidence
  • Resources
    • Forensic Consultations
    • Books
    • Cases
    • Featured Articles
    • Legislation
    • Motions and Briefs
      • Discovery Motions
      • Funding for Experts
      • Motions for Appropriate Relief
      • Motions to Exclude Expert Testimony
      • Motions for Independent Testing
      • Motions to Preserve Evidence
      • Motions to Suppress
      • Analyst Certification Motions
    • Reports & Publications
    • Trainings
    • Websites
    • Forensic Terminology
    • Online Research Tools
  • Crime Labs
    • General Information
    • NC State Crime Lab Procedures
    • Charlotte Mecklenburg Crime Lab
    • CCBI Lab Procedures
    • NC OCME Toxicology Lab
    • Pitt Co. Sheriff’s Forensic Services
    • Sec. of State Digital Forensic Lab
    • Wilmington Police Dept Crime Lab
    • Private and Out-of-State Labs
  • News Articles
  • Experts
    • Browse All Experts
    • Working with Experts
    • Expert Services Project
    • Add or Update Expert Records
    • Find a Private Investigator
  • Subscribe
  • Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

Forensic Resources

North Carolina Office of Indigent Defense Services

Header Right

MENUMENU
  • About
  • Blog
  • Forensic Disciplines
        • Foundations of Forensics
        • Arson
        • Bite Mark
        • Blood & Bodily Fluids
        • Child Abuse Allegations
        • Crime Scene Investigation
        • Death Investigation
        • Detection Dogs
        • Digital Evidence
        • DNA
        • Drug Analysis
        • Drug Recognition Experts
        • Eyewitness ID
        • Fingerprints
        • Firearms
        • Forensic/Sexual Assault Exams
        • Measurement Uncertainty
        • Mental Health
        • Toxicology
        • Trace Evidence
  • Resources
        • Forensic Consultations
        • Books
        • Cases
        • Featured Articles
        • Legislation
        • Reports & Publications
        • Trainings
        • Websites
        • Forensic Terminology
        • Online Research Tools
        • Motions and Briefs
          • Discovery Motions
          • Funding for Experts
          • Motions for Appropriate Relief
          • Motions to Exclude Expert Testimony
          • Motions for Independent Testing
          • Motions to Preserve Evidence
          • Motions to Suppress
          • Analyst Certification Motions
  • Crime Labs
    • General Information
    • NC State Crime Lab Procedures
    • Charlotte Mecklenburg Crime Lab
    • CCBI Lab Procedures
    • NC OCME Toxicology Lab
    • Pitt Co. Sheriff’s Forensic Services
    • Sec. of State Digital Forensic Lab
    • Wilmington Police Dept Crime Lab
    • Private and Out-of-State Labs
  • News Articles
  • Experts
    • Browse All Experts
    • Working with Experts
    • Expert Services Project
    • Add or Update Expert Records
    • Find a Private Investigator
  • Subscribe
You are here: Home / Archives for Cases

Cases

Can Law Enforcement Review Ankle Monitor Location Data Without a Warrant?

March 3, 2025 //  by Daniel Spiegel

Reposted from North Carolina Criminal Law, a UNC School of Government Blog Last September, the Court of Appeals decided State v. Thomas, No. COA23-210, __ N.C. App. __ (2024), a case involving law enforcement’s retrieval of ankle monitor location data gathered while the defendant was on post-release supervision. This is the first North Carolina appellate case …

Can Law Enforcement Review Ankle Monitor Location Data Without a Warrant?Read More

Category: CasesForensic Discipline: Digital Evidence

Smith v. Arizona Comes to NC

December 9, 2024 //  by Phil Dixon, Jr.

As regular readers know, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Smith v. Arizona, 602 U.S. 779 (2024), this past June. The decision undercut the reasoning used by North Carolina courts to justify the practice of permitting substitute analysts to offer an independent opinion about the forensic report of another, nontestifying analyst (as discussed here and here). Until this week, no …

Smith v. Arizona Comes to NCRead More

Category: CasesForensic Discipline: Crime Labs, Experts

Spring 2024 Cannabis Update (Part II)

April 19, 2024 //  by Phil Dixon, Jr.

This update was originally posted on Apr. 10, 2024 on North Carolina Criminal Law, a UNC School of Government Blog available here. In Part I of my Spring 2024 cannabis update, I discussed the search and seizure issues arising in North Carolina courts around cannabis. Part II explores drug identification evidence issues surrounding marijuana prosecutions and examines …

Spring 2024 Cannabis Update (Part II)Read More

Category: Cases, Practice TipsForensic Discipline: Drug Analysis

Spring 2024 Cannabis Update (Part I)

April 18, 2024 //  by Phil Dixon, Jr.

This update was originally posted on Apr. 8, 2024 on North Carolina Criminal Law, a UNC School of Government Blog available here. It has been a while since my last post on cannabis and criminal law issues, and it is past time for an update. In addition to a number of state cases grappling with …

Spring 2024 Cannabis Update (Part I)Read More

Category: Cases, Practice TipsForensic Discipline: Drug Analysis

Substitute Analyst Testimony and Smith v. Arizona

October 18, 2023 //  by Phil Dixon, Jr.

Originally posted on North Carolina Criminal Law, A UNC School of Government blog I mentioned in a recent News Roundup that the U.S. Supreme Court granted review in Smith v. Arizona. The case tees up a question that has been lingering since at least 2012: Does the Confrontation Clause permit the admission of substitute forensic analyst testimony? This …

Substitute Analyst Testimony and Smith v. ArizonaRead More

Category: CasesForensic Discipline: Experts

Limits Imposed on Ballistics Evidence by MD Supreme Court

July 21, 2023 //  by Sacejewia White

The Maryland Supreme Court granted a new trial after deciding that a firearms examiner should not have been permitted to offer an unqualified opinion that the crime scene bullets were fired from the defendant’s gun. Specifically, the reports, studies, and testimony relied on by the examiner did not demonstrate that the firearms identification methodology employed …

Limits Imposed on Ballistics Evidence by MD Supreme CourtRead More

Category: CasesForensic Discipline: Firearms

NJ Appellate Decision: Defense Entitled to Face Recognition Information

June 29, 2023 //  by Sacejewia White

Case Background Last September, the NACDL joined forces with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) to file an amicus brief in support of the defense in New Jersey v. Arteaga.  The question before the Appellate Division was whether the defense is entitled to information about how a face recognition search …

NJ Appellate Decision: Defense Entitled to Face Recognition InformationRead More

Category: CasesForensic Discipline: Digital Evidence

State v. Booth and marijuana identification

October 26, 2022 //  by Phil Dixon, Jr.

In case you missed it, the COA released State v. Booth on Oct. 18, 2022, dealing in part with lay opinions by officers identifying marijuana as such based on sight and odor only and without a proper lab test identifying the levels of delta-9 THC. The officer in Booth was permitted to testify that he could …

State v. Booth and marijuana identificationRead More

Category: CasesForensic Discipline: Drug Analysis

Hemp remains legal in NC

July 1, 2022 //  by Sarah Olson

With Governor Cooper signing it into law yesterday Senate Bill 455 which permanently excludes hemp from the legal definition of marijuana under state law in NC, hemp’s future as a widely-available consumer product in our state seems secure. Under the new legislation, the previous requirement that the hemp be cultivated or possessed by a grower …

Hemp remains legal in NCRead More

Category: Cases, ResourcesForensic Discipline: Drug Analysis

Geofence warrant was unconstitutional

March 8, 2022 //  by Sarah Olson

On Mar. 4, 2022, a federal judge ruled that use of geofence data in a Virginia case violated the Fourth Amendment. The decision in US v. Chatrie is available here. A geofence is law enforcement use of Google location data to find people who were near a crime scene. Geofence searches have been used in …

Geofence warrant was unconstitutionalRead More

Category: CasesForensic Discipline: Digital Evidence

DNA-only evidence not sufficient in CT case

August 14, 2021 //  by Sarah Olson

State v. Andre Dawson (2021) – Connecticut Supreme Court found that the state failed to present sufficient evidence of constructive possession where the defendant could not be excluded from a DNA mixture containing a partial profile found on a firearm.

DNA-only evidence not sufficient in CT caseRead More

Category: CasesForensic Discipline: DNA

State v. Sasek: Importance of making 702 challenges at trial

May 27, 2020 //  by Alec Rees

On May 19th, 2020 the North Carolina Court of Appeals issued its opinion State v. Sasek. Mr. Sasek was convicted in March of 2019 of possession with intent to sell or deliver a schedule II controlled substance and sale of methamphetamine, which led to the revocation of his probation. Defense counsel should be aware of …

State v. Sasek: Importance of making 702 challenges at trialRead More

Category: CasesForensic Discipline: Drug Recognition Experts

Noteworthy NC COA fingerprint opinion

April 15, 2020 //  by Sarah Olson

Defenders should take note of State v. Koiyan, COA19-951, an April 7, 2020 decision where the NC Court of Appeals found that the trial court erred by admitting fingerprint testimony where the examiner “failed to demonstrate that he ‘applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case,’ as required by Rule 702(a)(3).” …

Noteworthy NC COA fingerprint opinionRead More

Category: CasesForensic Discipline: Fingerprints

Testimony regarding an inconclusive DNA mixture

February 27, 2020 //  by Sarah Olson

State v. Phillips, COA19-372 (Dec. 2019) – NC Court of Appeals found that the admission of testimony about an inconclusive DNA mixture was expert testimony, was not based on sufficient facts or data nor is the product of is the product of reliable scientific principles and methods, and that the trial court erred in admitting the testimony which prejudiced the defendant.

Testimony regarding an inconclusive DNA mixtureRead More

Category: Cases, Practice TipsForensic Discipline: DNA

MI federal judge disallows testimony about DNA mixture interpretation

November 6, 2019 //  by Sarah Olson

Oct. 2019 – United States District Judge found that in a case involving interpretation of a complex DNA mixture where the relevant contributor contributed 7% of the DNA in the mixture, the STRmix software report did not meet the Daubert reliability standard for admissibility as evidence.

MI federal judge disallows testimony about DNA mixture interpretationRead More

Category: CasesForensic Discipline: DNA

  • Page 1
  • Page 2
  • Page 3
  • Go to Next Page »

Site Footer

The Forensic Resource Counsel provides assistance to North Carolina attorneys litigating scientific evidence issues.
Information provided on this website is for educational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.
Copyright © 2025 · Office of Indigent Defense Services · All Rights Reserved · Website by Tomatillo Design

Copyright © 2025 Forensic Resources · All Rights Reserved · Powered by Mai Theme