State Of Louisiana v. B.J. McElveen
This text of State Of Louisiana v. B.J. McElveen (State Of Louisiana v. B.J. McElveen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT
STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 2022 KW 1066
VERSUS
B. J. MCELVEEN SEPTEMBER 29, 2022
In Re: State of Louisiana, applying for supervisory writs,
19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, No. 09- 18- 0487.
BEFORE: WHIPPLE, C. J., GUIDRY AND WOLFE, JJ.
STAY LIFTED; WRIT GRANTED. The trial court' s ruling limiting testimony from the State' s DNA expert and excluding the lab reports is reversed. No error under the Confrontation Clause occurs when a DNA expert testifies that in his or her opinion
the DNA profile developed from a sample taken from defendant matches the DNA profile developed by other, non - testifying technicians from biological samples taken from the evidence.
State v. Bolden, 2011- 2435 ( La. 10/ 26/ 12), 108 So. 3d 1159, 1161- 62 ( per curiam). cf. State v. Oliphant, 2013- 273 ( La. App. 3rd Cir. 11/ 20/ 13), 127 So. 3d 91 ( the testimony of an alternate
crime lab employee regarding results of DNA analysis, rather
than employee who actually performed the analysis, did not
violate the defendant' s confrontation rights. The crime lab employee who actually performed the analysis was on maternity leave and the testifying employee was recognized as an expert in DNA analysis and admittedly familiar with the protocols and
procedures required of the analysis). Further, the Louisiana State Police Crime Laboratory scientific analysis reports are
admissible. Even if forensic DNA reports are admitted in evidence without in -court testimony of the scientist/ analyst who
either signed the certification or performed or observed the test reported in the certification, generally, there is no Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause violation because the reports are
not testimonial. State v. Grimes, 2011- 0984 ( La. App. 4th Cir. 2/ 20/ 13), 109 So. 3d 1007, writ denied, 2013- 0625 ( La. 10/ 11/ 13), 123 So. 3d 1216 ( citing Williams v. Illinois, 567 U. S. 50, 132 S. Ct. 2221, 183 L. Ed. 2d 89 ( 2012)).
VGW JMG EW
40 Y J_ CLERK OF COURT FOR THE COURT
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State Of Louisiana v. B.J. McElveen, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-louisiana-v-bj-mcelveen-lactapp-2022.