EvidenceProf Blog

Editor: Colin Miller
Univ. of South Carolina School of Law

Tuesday, July 24, 2018

Project DNA: Connecticut

Connecticut

The pertinent portion of Connnecticut's postconviction DNA testing statute, Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. §54-102kk(c)(1), provides in relevant part that:

(c) After notice to the prosecutorial official and a hearing, the court may order DNA testing if it finds that:

(1) A reasonable probability exists that the requested testing will produce DNA results which would have altered the verdict or reduced the petitioner's sentence if the results had been available at the prior proceedings leading to the judgment of conviction.

So, where does that leave pleading defendants?

Black's Law Dictionary defines a "verdict" as a “formal decision or finding made by a jury, impaneled and sworn for the trial of a cause, and reported to the court (and accepted by it) upon the matters duly submitted to them upon trial.” Therefore, Connecticut's postconviction DNA testing statute indirectly references a trial. As such, I think it is likely that Connecticut courts will interpret this statute to preclude pleading defendants from seeking relief. But, so far, I'm aware of any Connecticut cases in which pleading defendants sought postconviction DNA testing.

-CM

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/2018/07/connecticut-the-pertinent-portion-of-connnecticuts-postconviction-dna-testing-statute-conn-gen-stat-ann-54-102kkc1.html

| Permalink

Comments

Post a comment