Search

Category: Post-Charge – No Related Resources
Investigative Resource Repository

Order on Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Re: Genetic Information (State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger)

The accused was charged with four counts of murder and one count of burglary where four students were found cut and stabbed to death in their residence. After a hearing conducted on the defendant’s motion claiming violations of the Fourth Amendment’s provisions regarding search and seizure, the trial court denied the defendant’s motions to suppress and addressed the following issues in its rulings:
February 2025
Investigative Resource Repository

Harvin v. State of Maryland (2024) Opinion

Appeals Court decision upholding admissibility of process utilizing TrueAllele®, a probabilistic genotyping software (PGS). This process was used to interpret DNA mixtures detected on several items recovered during an investigation of a sexual assault of an 83-year-old female victim. The Court’s opinion includes a helpful discussion on experts in general, as well as a discussion on the use of PGS for forensic purposes. The Court also discusses the recently adopted Daubert standard in criminal cases. The Supreme Court of Maryland denied petition for writ of certiorari on January 29, 2025 (petition number 355).
September 2024
FindLaw

State v. Carbo (2024) Opinion – Supreme Court of Minnesota

The Supreme Court of Minnesota held that the defendant in this homicide prosecution has no reasonable expectation of privacy in the semen collected at the crime scene or in the items he had discarded in a communal trash bin. However, there are concurring and dissenting opinions to the majority ruling. An additional issue addressed in this ruling pertained to the trial court improperly excluding alternative perpetrator evidence whereby the conviction was reversed and remanded for that reason.
May 2024
FindLaw

State v. Westrom (2024) Opinion – Supreme Court of Minnesota

The Supreme Court of Minnesota held that the defendant in this homicide prosecution has no reasonable expectation of privacy in a discarded napkin which was retrieved by police and tested for DNA leading to a DNA profile that was associated with a DNA profile recovered from crime scene. Other issues addressed in this ruling include: 1) exclusion of alternative perpetrator evidence, 2) exclusion of the defendant’s forensic podiatry evidence, 3) the state’s closing argument was not improper, and 4) circumstantial evidence was sufficient for conviction.
May 2024

© 2025 All rights reserved​