≡ Menu

6. 974.07, DNA testing

State v. Ouati K. Ali, 2011AP2169, District 4, 11/1/12 court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity Postconviction Proceedings – Right to Counsel  A defendant has no constitutional right to counsel outside the direct appeal period, therefore Ali’s argument that failure to appoint counsel counsel to pursue DNA testing deprived him of due… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Dwain M. Staten, 2011AP916-CR, District 1, 5/8/12 court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Staten: Michael J. Steinle; case activity Postconviction DNA Testing, § 974.07  Postconviction testing at state expense requires, among other things, that the defendant show a reasonable probability he wouldn’t have been prosecuted or convicted with exculpatory test results. Staten… Read more

{ 0 comments }

On Point is very pleased to present this guest post discussion of Skinner v. Switzer by Brandon L. Garrett, Professor of Law, University of Virginia. Professor Garrett’s most recent book, “Convicting the Innocent,” was reviewed by in the New York Times Sunday Book Review 5/26/11. The U.S. Supreme Court settled another boundary dispute about what… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Henry W. Skinner v. Switzer, USSC No. 09-9000, 3/7/11 A convicted state prisoner may utilize 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to seek DNA testing of crime-scene evidence. When may a state prisoner, complaining of unconstitutional state action, pursue a civil rights claim under §1983, and when is habeas corpus the prisoner’s sole remedy? … We summarized… Read more

{ 0 comments }

7th circuit decision Habeas – Filing Deadline – DNA Motion as Tolling Price’s postconviction motion for DNA testing in Illinois state court didn’t toll the 28 U.S.C. § 2254 federal habeas deadline, and his habeas petition is therefore deemed untimely. The court’s analysis relates to Illinois procedure. As will be seen, Wisconsin’s is meaningfully different… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Question Presented: May a convicted prisoner seeking access to biological evidence for DNA testing assert that claim in a claim in a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, or is such a claim cognizable only in a petition for writ of habeas corpus? Docket: 09-9000 Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Petitioner’s reply… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. James M. Moran, 2005 WI 115, reversing unpublished decision For Moran: Colleen D. Ball, State Bar Pro Bono Project Issue/Holding: ¶3 We conclude that the plain language of § 974.07(6) gives a movant the right to conduct DNA testing of physical evidence that is in the actual or constructive possession of a government… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Kenneth A. Hudson, 2004 WI App 99 For Hudson: David D. Cook Issue/Holding: ¶11. Hudson first argues that under Wis. Stat. § 974.07(6)(a), the State must “make available” physical evidence containing biological material for independent DNA testing. Subsection (6)(a) states: Upon demand the district attorney shall disclose to the movant or his or her… Read more

{ 0 comments }
RSS