Campbell v. People

Summary

The Colorado Supreme Court reviewed whether admitting expert testimony about a DNA profile developed by a non-testifying analyst violated the Confrontation Clause and constituted plain error. It held that any error was not plain because the governing law was unsettled, including after the U.S. Supreme Court's fractured decision in Williams v. Illinois. The court also held that mislabeling a prior felony conviction in a habitual offender charge created a simple variance rather than a constructive amendment requiring reversal, and affirmed the court of appeals' judgment while remanding for resentencing and correction of the mittimus.

Holdings

1. Any error in allowing the Denver Crime Lab expert to testify about the DNA profile developed from the plum by a non-testifying analyst was not plain because the governing law was unsettled at the time of trial and remained insufficiently clear at the time of appellate review.
2. The prosecution did not constructively amend the habitual-offender count. Because the charging document identified the prior conviction by case number, jurisdiction, and date and the prosecution proved the felony conviction associated with those identifiers, the discrepancy in the offense label was a simple variance that did not prejudice Campbell's substantial rights.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court plainly erred by allowing a Denver Crime Lab expert to provide testimony concerning a DNA profile developed by a non-testifying Virginia laboratory analyst.
2. Whether the prosecution constructively amended a habitual-offender count by alleging a specifically mislabeled prior felony but proving the different felony conviction associated with the case number, jurisdiction, and date identified in the charging document.

Disposition

affirmed