Summary
The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the denial of Jeffrey A. Cookson’s motion for post-conviction DNA analysis of clothing allegedly connected to a double murder. The Court held that Cookson failed to present prima facie evidence establishing the required chain of custody, particularly for the two-year period before the items were provided to police. A dissent argued that the majority improperly required Cookson to disprove every possibility of tampering and applied an overly demanding standard.
Holdings
- Cookson failed to present prima facie evidence establishing that the clothing was related to the murders and had not been moved or tampered with during the two-year period before it was produced to police. The Superior Court therefore properly denied the motion for DNA testing.
Questions Presented
- Whether Cookson presented the prima facie evidence required by 15 M.R.S. § 2138(4-A)(B) to establish a sufficient chain of custody for post-conviction DNA testing.
- Whether the Superior Court properly concluded that the evidence did not establish that the clothing had not been substituted, tampered with, replaced, or materially altered during the period before police possession.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (13)
- State v. Cookson, 2003 ME 136, 837 A.2d 101(followed)
- Cookson v. State, 2011 ME 53, 17 A.3d 1208(followed)
- Laferriere v. State, 1997 ME 169, 697 A.2d 1301(followed)
- Anderson v. Delaware, 831 A.2d 858 (Del. 2003)(followed)
- Town of Blue Hill v. Leighton, 2011 ME 103, 30 A.3d 848(followed)
- State v. Beane, 146 Me. 328, 81 A.2d 924 (1951)(followed)
- State v. Thibodeau, 353 A.2d 595 (Me. 1976)(followed)
- State v. Thompson, 503 A.2d 689 (Me. 1986)(followed)
- State v. Cress, 344 A.2d 57 (Me. 1975)(followed)
- State v. Lewis, 401 A.2d 645 (Me. 1979)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 13.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…