State v. Jenkins

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Criminal Procedure
  • Date Filed: 03-29-2017
  • Case #: A154925
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Ortega, P.J. for the Court; Lagesen, J.; & Garrett, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Under Romero, a Defendant must have affidavit supporting a request for DNA testing, and a prima facie showing of actual innocence “necessarily requires the defendant to establish a logical relationship between the presumed exculpatory DNA results and the defendant’s theory of defense in the context of the underlying trial proceedings, as will be required for a later showing of actual innocence.

Defendant appealed an order denying his motion for DNA testing, arguing that the trial court erroneously concluded that he had not met the requirements set out in ORS 138.692. Defendant failed to present a prima facie showing that DNA testing would assume exculpatory results. Under Romero, a Defendant must have an affidavit supporting a request for DNA testing, and a prima facie showing of actual innocence “necessarily requires the defendant to establish a logical relationship between the presumed exculpatory DNA results and the defendant’s theory of defense in the context of the underlying trial proceedings, as will be required for a later showing of actual innocence. In this case even if the Court assumed the results of independent retesting would not show Defendant’s DNA, there is no reason to believe that evidence would establish Defendant’s actual innocence. Affirmed.

Advanced Search