DNA

NC State Crime Lab

By: John M. Butler, Hari Iyer, Rich Press, Melissa K. Taylor, Peter M. Vallone, & Sheila Willis

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has published DNA Mixture Interpretation: A Scientific Foundation Review. This draft report, which will be open for public comment for 60 days before being published in final form, reviews the methods that forensic laboratories use to interpret evidence containing a mixture of DNA from two or more people. 

The Organization of Scientific Area Committees for Forensic Evidence (OSAC) develops documentary standards for forensics through a standards developing organization or other consensus-based process that allows for participation and comment from relevant stakeholders. Standards under consideration as well as approved standards are available in the OSAC Registry. Standards are being developed for each forensic discipline.

The American Academy of Forensic Sciences Standards Board develops documentary standards for forensics through a consensus process, involving participation by all directly and materially affected persons. The standards that have been published are available on the ASB website. Standards are being developed for each forensic discipline.

Author: Bess Stiffelman Esq.

The NC State Crime Laboratory has posted its DNA Section Audit Reports (1999-2018). If you would like a summary of these audits, with issues that may be relevant to casework highlighted, email Sarah Rackley Olson.

NIST has created this document to explain why DNA mixture interpretation can be so complex and to explain how likelihood ratios and probabilistic genotyping software can assist with interpreting complex mixtures.

Standards and best practices for the collection, preservation, and testing of DNA evidence and for its use at trial, published in 2018.

In Nov. 2017, the Royal Society published this primer to assist the UK judiciary when handling DNA and serology evidence in the courtroom. The primer provides a good introduction to forensic DNA analysis, including a description of different types of DNA mixture interpretation software.

This 2017 guide presents information about DNA forensics in a way that is accessible to both a general audience and legal professionals. It focuses on topics such as the context in which DNA evidence is discovered, DNA databases, statistics, and use of DNA to predict appearance or ancestry.

Starting Jan. 1, 2017, forensic labs that participate in the FBI’s National DNA Index System (NDIS) increased the number of genetic markers analyzed from 13 to 20. Analyzing an increased number of genetic markers will make the DNA profiles more compatible with international DNA searches and will decrease the likelihood of a random match of two individuals within the NDIS database.

Chicago Tribune article uses a case example to demonstrate the dangers of using DNA evidence that has very little probative value. New technology is allowing DNA analysis to be performed on very small amounts of DNA which may generate incomplete genetic profiles that may or may not be meaningful in a case.

by William C. Thompson, Laurence D. Mueller, and Dan E. Krane. The Champion, Dec. 2012. This article is a must-read for attorneys dealing with cases with DNA evidence. The authors show how subjectivity and bias may play a role in DNA analysis, particularly in cases involving very small amounts of DNA, partial profiles, or mixtures.

This manual for defense attorneys was written by a group of experienced defense attorneys and DNA experts. Its approach to basic and advanced topics is easy to understand. In addition to explaining the science and techniques of DNA analysis, the manual offers advice on topics such as opening and closing statements, jury selection, and cross examination.

by Linda Geddes, New Scientist, August 11, 2010 – gives an explanation of how subjectivity and bias affect DNA analysis. Discusses issues such as partial profiles, allelic drop-out and drop-in, mixtures, and thresholds for analysis.

by Roland AH van Oorschot etal. Investigative Genetics (2010). In a very accessible way, this article describes issues associated with what is often called “touch DNA.” Topics covered include evidence collection, DNA extraction, amplification, profiling and interpretation of trace DNA samples.

See pp. 128-133 for the National Research Counsel’s description of the forensic use of Deoxyribonucleic acid

by William C. Thompson, for the Council for Responsible Genetics (2008) – discusses how false incriminations can occur in forensic DNA testing, including coincidental DNA profile matches, accidental transfer of DNA, errors in labeling of samples, and misinterpretation of test results.

by Samuel Lindsey etal. Jurimetrics 43 (2003). This article presents what DNA analyses can and cannot reveal and a way to improve judges’ and jurors’ understanding of evidence involving probabilities and statistics.

by Peter Gill, Croatian Medical Journal (2001). This 4-page article describes considerations that must be taken into account with Low Copy number (LCN) DNA, including allele dropout and the possibility of contamination. Low Copy number DNA analysis allows a DNA profile to be obtained from just a few cells.

Defenders may be interested to read the Connecticut Supreme Court decision, State v. Andre Dawson (2021) in which the 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. In the case, a …

Attorneys handling cases involving DNA evidence should be aware of a recent NC Court of Appeals decision, State v. Phillips, COA19-372. In Dec. 2019, the 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 …

Counsel should be aware of the Oct. 2019 ruling in which a 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. …

In 2010, Michael Ryan was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to death for a 2007 homicide. While the case was on direct appeal and as a result of the Motion for Appropriate Relief hearing, an order issued by Judge W. Erwin Spainhour granted Michael Ryan a new trial in 2017. The State appealed …

Attorneys from several counties have received notice through discovery that their cases that their cases were potentially affected by a DNA testing issue at National Medical Services (NMS) Labs in Pennsylvania. DA’s offices in various jurisdictions have sent samples to NMS Labs for DNA testing in recent years. The issue that has been identified is …

NC attorneys may be aware that software programs are being adopted by crime laboratories to assist with interpreting complex DNA mixtures. The NC State Crime Laboratory is working on validating a procedure for the use of STRmix probabilistic genotyping software, which will likely go online in the coming months. It is crucial that attorneys understand …

In 2018, the NC General Assembly passed legislation (S.L. 2018-70) requiring the creation of the a statewide tracking system to track the testing of Sexual Assault Evidence Collection Kits (SAECKs) from collection to completion of forensic testing. The tracking system is now available for all stakeholders in the criminal justice system.   For kits collected …

Superior Court Judge Chris Bragg has overturned Mark Carver’s murder conviction and ordered a new trial. Mr. Carver had been convicted in 2011 of the murder of a UNC Charlotte student. Chris Mumma, executive director of the North Carolina Center on Actual Innocence, represents Mr. Carver. She argued and the court ruled that Mr. Carver …

NIST has created a primer on interpretation of DNA mixtures that explains what are DNA mixtures and why are they sometimes so difficult to interpret. The primer was published on April 3, 2019 and covers topics including: Low sensitivity vs. high sensitivity methods for detecting DNA When is a peak a peak? How to determine …

In 2018, the NC General Assembly passed legislation (S.L. 2018-70) requiring the creation of the a statewide tracking system to track the testing of Sexual Assault Evidence Collection Kits (SAECKs) from collection to completion of forensic testing. The tracking system is now available for all stakeholders in the criminal justice system. For kits collected on …

Julie Valentine et al. in Journal of Forensic Nursing (2021)

June 2021 article by Marc Canellas. IEEE’s 1012 Standard for independent software and hardware verification and validation (IV&V) is under attack in U.S. federal criminal court. As software spreads through the criminal legal system, scientists, engineers, and IEEE have an essential role in ensuring courts understand and respect IEEE 1012 and IV&V. If scientists, engineers, and IEEE do not engage, courts will continue to allow unreliable scientific evidence to deprive people of their life and liberty.

This document responds to the DNA Mixture Interpretation: A NIST Scientific Foundation Review (draft) document from June 2021. STRmix prepared this document as guidance for STRmix users who may encounter the NIST review in the court setting.

By: John S. Buckleton, D.Sc.; Jo-Anne Bright, Ph.D.; Simone Gittelson, Ph.D.; Tamyra R. Moretti, Ph.D.; Anthony J. Onorato, M.C.I.M., M.S.F.S.; Frederick R. Bieber, Ph.D.; Bruce Budowle, Ph.D.; and Duncan A. Taylor, Ph.D.

A report of the Law Commission of Ontario which considers the role and impact of AI-driven probabilistic genotyping technology to generate evidence used in the criminal justice system. The report makes a number of recommendations based on concerns that PG DNA evidence may lead to wrongful convictions if not properly regulated.

Bruce Budowle provides an overview of challenges to STRMix and other PG software for The Prosecutor magazine.

Abstract:
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is a scientific research agency that works to advance measurement science, standards, and technology and that has been working to strengthen forensic science methods for almost a century. In recent years, several scientific advisory bodies have expressed the need for scientific foundation reviews of forensic disciplines and identified NIST as an appropriate agency for conducting them.

The purpose of a scientific foundation review is to identify and document information supporting methods and practices used in forensic analysis and to identify knowledge gaps where they exist. Beginning in fiscal year 2018, Congress appropriated funds for NIST to conduct scientific foundation reviews.

NIST has begun reviews of DNA mixture interpretation, bitemark analysis, digital evidence, and firearms examination. In addition to providing insights into these specific disciplines, the initial reviews serve as pilot studies which will guide future efforts.

This document outlines NIST’s approach to conducting scientific foundation reviews, including data sources used, evaluation criteria, and expected outputs.

Prepared by the Wisconsin Public Defender’s Office

Information prepared by the Wisconsin Public Defender’s Office

Author: Bess Stiffelman Esq.

This 2013 document traces the development of forensic DNA analysis and its use by the NC State Crime Lab. It attempts to identify what technologies were available at what time. Information about the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department Crime Laboratory is not included.

Webinar offered by the Mecklenburg County Public Defender's Office. Speaker: Dr. Maher "Max" Noureddine.

Virtual program offered by John Jay College of Criminal Justice. Reg. $150

Virtual CLE offered by NCAJ

Touch DNA evidence (i.e. the low quantities of DNA that can be left behind when someone touches an object) is of increasing importance in criminal investigations. However, many important questions exist regarding basic properties of touch DNA, including the expected stability of touch DNA samples following exposure to different environmental conditions.

This Forensic Technology Center of Excellence webinar will review existing scientific literature, describe lessons-learned and best practices for conducting experiments with touch DNA, and describe the initial results of a study designed to evaluate the stability of touch DNA under different environmental conditions. Five controlled environmental conditions were established with highly controlled temperature, relative humidity, and ultraviolet light levels. A formal randomization scheme was implemented to minimize sources of potential variability. The stability of both control DNA and touch DNA samples collected from donors was evaluated. DNA was collected and purified at different time points, quantified using the Quantifiler HP kit, and evaluated for the ability to yield a full short-tandem repeat profile. The data were used to fit predictive models of DNA concentration given time and environmental condition. Collectively, these studies meet a critical need to provide comprehensive, well-controlled data and predictive models regarding the stability of touch DNA in real-world scenarios.

3 Detailed Learning Objectives

• Understand the significance and challenges of working with touch DNA evidence
• Learn best-practices for design of experiments involving touch DNA
• Learn the impact of environmental conditions on the stability of touch DNA.

Presenters: 

Dr. Natalie Damaso, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Laboratory
Dr. Meghan Ramsey, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Laboratory

Free webinar sponsored by NY Legal Aid Society

This four-part webinar series presented by Promega provides information on new/emerging standards and best practice recommendations applicable to forensic biology and DNA testing laboratories. These documents include new requirements for training and validation in serology and various aspects of DNA testing, as well as DNA data interpretation and software, and protocol development and verification. This fourth webinar will describe the ANSI/ASB Standard 018, Validation Standard for Probabilistic Genotyping Systems, First Edition.

The Mecklenburg County Public Defender’s Office is hosting a free-to-attend CLE webinar on DNA Mixture Interpretation: Conventional and Software-driven Probabilistic Genotyping Methods. Pending approval by the NC State Bar, this CLE is for 2 general hours (1 of which can count as the technology hour) and the State Bar will charge you $3.50/hour.

Please register at the link below. Registration will close on January 4, 2021. Only those that register and confirm attendance after the webinar will be reported for CLE credit to the NC State Bar.

Register for January 8th Webinar

When: January 8, 2021 from 1-3pm. You may sign on as early as 12:45.

Where: Wherever you have internet access. Another email will be sent the week of the webinar with instructions on how to join. 

What:   

Section 1:  Overview of DNA Analysis and Interpretation of Forensic DNA Mixtures 

This section will focus on forensic DNA testing and data analysis.  A brief overview of DNA testing theory will be presented, followed by a description of modern DNA forensic testing platforms that are currently in use (STR and Y-STR). The audience will learn more about conventional mixture DNA profile interpretation, recent updates and limitations, and statistical analysis reflecting the weight of DNA evidence.  Relevant laboratory standard operating procedures and interpretation protocols will be discussed.  

Section 2:  Complex DNA Mixtures Interpretation and the Incorporation of Probabilistic Genotyping (PG) Software Technologies.  

During this section of the CLE, the attendees will learn more about the theory of mixture DNA interpretation using computer-based probabilistic models, the power and limitations of PG software, and the challenges of confronting PG results in court cases.  The presentation will incorporate actual case examples.  

Who: Dr. Maher Noureddine, PhD.  is a molecular geneticist with and extensive background in scientific research and training in human genetics.  Dr. Noureddine earned his B.S. in Biology from Radford University in Virginia, an M.S. in Molecular Biology from the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, and a Ph.D. in Molecular Genetics from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He then completed a postdoctoral fellowship at Duke University Medical Center (The Center for Human Genetics), where he published many articles on the genetics of Parkinson Disease and other human genetic disorders. In 2005, Dr. Noureddine was a Senior Research Fellow at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences/NIH, where he studied the tumor suppressor gene p53 and genomic variations that confer cancer susceptibility in humans.  His expertise includes specialized training in complex genomics, Mitochondrial genomics and bioenergetics, Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNP) analysis, and gene structure and function studies.  Between 2007 and 2011, he served as Chief Science Officer at Thought Leader Select, LLC, where he led many consulting projects for the top global pharmaceutical companies in various therapeutic areas.  In 2011, he established ForensiGen, LLC, a consulting company that specializes in forensic DNA and serology evidence evaluation, interpretation, evidence testing, and education for law professionals.  Dr. Noureddine has served as an expert witness on numerous criminal and civil cases involving DNA and serology evidence in State and Federal courts.  He is a diplomat of the American Board of Criminalistics, and a member of the International Society of Forensic Genetics, the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, the American Society of Human Genetics, and the International Association for Identification.  He is an adjunct teaching faculty in the Department of Forensic Science at Radford University. 

If you are an investigator or paralegal and need credit for attending, please send the appropriate form to me to sign and I will sign and return it to you.

If you’d like a refresher on the topic before Dr. Noureddine’s presentation, here are two helpful videos:

• Dan Crane’s YouTube presentation gives a nice perspective on the problem (complex mixtures) and solution (probabilistic interpretation)
• Overview of the software by Adam McCarthy, one of the software developers

Please contact Anthony.Monaghan@mecklenburgcountync.gov with any questions or concerns.

11-minute demonstration of how the STRmix software suite works. This video will provide attorneys with an introduction to the user interface and reports produced by STRmix software.

55-minute introduction to probabilistic genotyping by Dr. Dan E. Krane of Wright State University.

Offered by FTCOE, Speaker: Catherine Grgicak

Offered by NIST

This free virtual conference will cover topics including seized drugs, toxicology, DNA, and more.

Offered by Promega on July 15, 2020.

Presenter: Dr. Max Noureddine, Offered by IDS during 3 weeks in July 2020. Materials are available.

Offered by FTCOE in Oct. 2018. Materials available.

Following a short introduction from the CSAFE center staff, Dr. John Butler, NIST Special Programs Office, and Dr. Hari Iyer, NIST Statistical Design, Analysis and Modeling Group will present a free one-hour webinar on DNA mixture interpretation.

In the process of working on a NIST Scientific Foundation Review on DNA mixture interpretation over the past two years, CSAFE’s team has gathered and studied the scientific literature on the topic and carefully considered principles and best practices. Key principles will be reviewed and a brief history of DNA mixture interpretation approaches will be presented. Some thoughts on reliability and relevance will be discussed in the context of measurement and interpretation issues involving probabilistic genotyping approaches that are being used to examine complex, low-level DNA mixtures.

The Mecklenburg County Public Defender’s Office is hosting a free to attend CLE on DNA Mixture Interpretation: Conventional and Software-driven Probabilistic Genotyping Methods. Pending approval by the NC State Bar, this CLE is for 2.5 general hours (one of which will satisfy the technology hour requirement if you attend the last 90 minutes of the CLE) and the NC State Bar will charge attendees $3.50/hour ($8.75 total).

As space is limited: Register for December 13th CLE

When: December 13, 2019. Registration begins at 12:00 and the CLE will begin at 12:30 with a 15 minute break at 1:30. The CLE will end at 3:15.

Where: Mecklenburg County Public Defender’s Office 4^th floor conference room (to the left off the stairs/elevator from the main entrance of 720 E 4^th St Charlotte, NC 28202)

Agenda

Section 1:  Introduction: Forensic DNA Analysis and Interpretation of Forensic DNA Mixtures (12:30 PM to 1:30 PM: 60 mins)

This section will focus on forensic DNA testing and data analysis.  A brief overview of DNA testing theory will be presented, followed by a description of modern DNA forensic testing platforms that are currently in use (STR and Y-STR). The audience will learn more about conventional mixture DNA profile interpretation, recent updates and limitations, and statistical analysis reflecting the weight of DNA evidence.  Relevant laboratory standard operating procedures and interpretation protocols will be discussed.

Section 2:  Issues with Interpreting Complex DNA Mixtures and the Incorporation of Probabilistic Genotyping (PG) Software Technologies (1:45 PM to 3:15 PM: 90 min)

During this section of the CLE, the attendees will learn more about the theory of mixture DNA interpretation using computer-based probabilistic models, the power and limitations of PG software, and the challenges of confronting PG results in court cases.  The presentation will incorporate actual case examples. 

Who: Dr. Maher Noureddine, PhD  is a molecular geneticist with and extensive background in scientific research and training in human genetics as well as expertise in the area of pharmaceutical industry consulting.  Dr. Noureddine earned his B.S. in Biology from Radford University in Virginia, an M.S. in Molecular Biology from the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, and a Ph.D. in Molecular Genetics from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He then completed a postdoctoral fellowship at Duke University Medical Center (The Center for Human Genetics), where he published many articles on the genetics of Parkinson Disease and other human genetic disorders. His expertise includes specialized training in complex genomics, DNA fingerprinting, Mitochondrial genomics and bioenergetics, Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNP) analysis, and state of the art methodologies in gene structure and function studies. In 2005, Dr. Noureddine was a Senior Research Fellow at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences/NIH, where he studied the tumor suppressor gene p53 and genomic variations that confer cancer susceptibility in humans.  Dr. Noureddine led many consulting projects for the top global pharmaceutical companies in therapeutic areas such as Diabetes, Atrial Fibrillation, Lung Disease, Kidney Disease, Neurodegenerative Disease, Inflammatory Disorders, Hemophilia, and many others.  He is President of ForensiGen, LLC, a company that specializes in providing law professionals with sound counsel and expertise in forensic DNA evidence evaluation, interpretation, and evidence retesting.  Established in 2011, ForensiGen LLC also provides general consulting services in genetic testing for maternity, paternity, infidelity, and disease testing. Dr. Noureddine has served as an expert on numerous criminal and civil cases involving DNA and serology evidence in NC and other States. He is a diplomat of the American Board of Criminalistics, and a member of the International Society of Forensic Genetics, the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, the American Society of Human Genetics, and the International Association for Identification. 

Co-sponsored by the NC State Crime Laboratory & Office of Indigent Defense Services

The NC State Crime Laboratory and NC Office of Indigent Defense Services will offer a free-to-attend CLE that is designed to enhance the knowledge of criminal defense attorneys and criminal defense investigators. Senior forensic scientists from the State Crime Lab will present updates and key information about the analysis of physical evidence in the disciplines of Forensic Biology (DNA), Firearms, and Digital Evidence. The Laboratory is working on validating the use of a new software program (STRMix) to interpret DNA mixtures. Once this software is implemented, DNA laboratory reports will have a new format and new conclusions will be used. This program aims to familiarize attorneys with this new program and the testimony that will be provided in court.

Following these presentations, the speakers will address questions from attorneys. Due to the confidential nature of casework, questions about specific cases will not be answered. Attorneys can schedule a meeting at the State Crime Lab to discuss the case with the analyst. Registration is available here. Attendees are encouraged to submit questions ahead of time using the registration form or by emailing sarah.r.olson@nccourts.org.

Attorneys receiving CLE credit will be billed $3.50 per credit hour by the NC State Bar. 3.0 hours of general CLE credit is anticipated. Non-attorneys who wish to receive continuing education credit will receive certificates of attendance.

A new method for interpreting DNA mixtures will be coming online in NC in the coming months. A webinar was offered on Aug. 13, 2019 from 12-2 pm to train attorneys on DNA analyst testimony and new methodologies. The archived recording of the webinar is available on demand.

This complimentary forensic science webinar is offered by the National Clearinghouse for Science, Technology, and the Law at Stetson Law. The program is presented by Rachel Oefelein, the Quality Assurance Manager and a Senior DNA Analyst at DNA Labs International. Ms. Oefelein will present DNA Evidence Essentials: Preparing for Expert Testimony with a Forensic DNA Analyst: New Technologies.

The webinar focused on:

• Basics of DNA analysis
• Compare/contrast types of services available at public vs. private lab
• What is probabilistic genotyping
• Questions attorneys should ask the experts
• Related case law; and preparing for testimony

The webinar is part of the complimentary webinar series, Crime Scene to Courtroom Forensics Training, a project supported by a grant from the Bureau of Justice Assistance.

Module 8 of Online Series: Probabilistic Genotyping of Evidentiary DNA Typing Results. Archived webinar available for free on-demand viewing.

Module 7 of Online Series: Probabilistic Genotyping of Evidentiary DNA Typing Results. Archived webinar available for free on-demand viewing.

Module 6 of Online Series: Probabilistic Genotyping of Evidentiary DNA Typing Results. Archived webinar now available for free on-demand viewing.

Module 5 of Online Series: Probabilistic Genotyping of Evidentiary DNA Typing Results. Archived webinar now available for free on-demand viewing.

Module 4 of Online Series: Probabilistic Genotyping of Evidentiary DNA Typing Results. Archived webinar now available for free on-demand viewing.

Module 3 of Online Series: Probabilistic Genotyping of Evidentiary DNA Typing Results. Archived webinar now available for free on-demand viewing.

Module 2 of Online Series: Probabilistic Genotyping of Evidentiary DNA Typing Results. Archived webinar now available for free on-demand viewing.

Module 1 of Online Series: Probabilistic Genotyping of Evidentiary DNA Typing Results. Archived webinar now available for free on-demand viewing.

3-minute video explains the basics of DNA’s form and function. Though the focus of this animated film is not forensic DNA, it gives important introductory information that is useful as a building block for understanding forensic DNA analysis.

Boston University Biomedical Forensic Sciences has put lessons on interpretation of DNA Mixtures online. These lessons show many examples of the phenomena that they discuss, which is helpful for understanding this complex topic.

Feb. 2015 Ted Talk video by Dr. Greg Hampikian covers forensic DNA errors including statistical and interpretation errors and contamination issues.

This virtual CLE is designed to provide a foundation in the principles and evaluation of forensic DNA evidence. It may be viewed for free or for a small fee for CLE credit. Dr. Max Noureddine describes basic concepts of human genetics, key terms related to DNA evidence, laboratory procedures, technologies that aim at increasing the reliability of forensic DNA testing, and some limitations of these tools. Participants will learn about the electropherogram and become familiar with basic profile comparisons as well as anomalies and artifacts that are often revealed in electropherogram data.

NIST scientist Becky Steffen answers questions regarding her preparation of a “Human DNA Standard” which helps forensic laboratories maintain accurate DNA test results.

Sample direct and cross-examinations of various forensic witnesses, including a firearm/toolmark expert, fingerprint expert, pathologist, DNA expert, and other forensic experts.

The NIJ has a number of free or low cost software tools that may be of assistance in understanding forensic evidence disciplines of digital forensics, arson investigation, DNA, death investigation, and more.

The National Forensic Science Technology Center created this website to explain in simplified terms the principles of each type of forensic analysis and how the analysis is performed. Topics include DNA, digital evidence, fingerprints, firearms, trace evidence, blood stains, and more.

DNA experts in OH with videos, articles, and a glossary of DNA testing terms available for free download on their website.

Forensic DNA analysis resources compiled by John Butler. Includes training materials, technical information, and a collection of data by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

A group of approximately 50 scientists representing federal, state, and local forensic DNA laboratories in the United States and Canada. SWGDAM periodically issues new Interpretation Guidelines that crime labs then implement. The 2017 guidelines that supersede the 2010 guidelines are available on the SWGDAM website. FAQ page contains helpful information.

• 2013 SWGDAM Interpretation Guidelines for Mitochondrial DNA Analysis by Forensic DNA Testing Laboratories
• 2015 SWGDAM Guidelines for Validation of Probabilistic Genotyping Systems

Law and Technology Resources for Legal Professionals compiled this list of books, articles, and other publications that treat different aspects of DNA evidence, including DNA databases, forensic interpretation of DNA evidence, 4th and 5th Amendment concerns, and more.

UNC School of Government blog post by Jeff Welty on the Supreme Court case Maryland v. King which allows the taking of DNA from arrestees.

Defendant successfully appealed a murder conviction on a motion for appropriate relief by showing, with expert testimony, that SBI policies for interpreting mixture DNA evidence at the time were outdated and inaccurate based on current accepted practices. A new trial was awarded.

The prosecutor had a DNA analyst testify about an inconclusive mixture. Such testimony was not “based on sufficient facts or data” nor “the product of reliable principles and methods.” Erroneous admission of expert testimony regarding DNA evidence recovered from minor victim was prejudicial in statutory rape prosecution.

New trial ordered where State Crime Lab forensic scientist was required to testify about DNA sample despite her insistence that the testimony was not scientifically valid. Court of Appeals found that the testimony was expert opinion testimony and did not satisfy prongs 1 or 2 of Rule 702 where the expert was asked to testify regarding an inconclusive profile in a DNA mixture.

Successful Daubert challenge to the admissibility of STRMix genotyping software due to the complexity of the DNA mixture in the case at hand.

The defendant’s Daubert motion and the ruling are linked in this article.

UNC School of Government blog post by Jeff Welty on the Supreme Court case Maryland v. King which allows the taking of DNA from arrestees.

Three reports were written about the same SBI DNA testing in this case: the first report in 5/09 said defendant excluded as source of DNA; the second report in 6/09 changed the conclusion and said the results were “inconclusive” (the internal SBI lab “reviewer” made the analyst change the report); and the third report in 8/11 said defendant was excluded. For more information about this case, click here.

• Motion for Sanctions for Brady Violations
• Lab Reports
• Transcript of Analyst Winningham’s testimony

Motion to exclude the SBI’s analysis of DNA evidence where analysis entirely consumed the sample and was performed in violation of a court order. Drafted by Lisa Dubs and Mark Rabil.

• Orders – Orders from the case above, including Order to Preserve Evidence and Notes, order to not test evidence without written consent of the state and the defense or upon a court order, order excluding evidence of SBI testing, and dismissal of charges.

Sample discovery motion regarding DNA evidence.

This checklist can help attorneys identify what DNA lab reports have been received in discovery and what additional items may need to be requested.