Editor's note: A previous post concerning a United States Supreme Court case about post-conviction DNA testing appears here. Recently, I've been getting a lot of calls about requests for post-conviction DNA testing. Since there seems to be a bit of confusion about how these requests should be made and handled, I thought it might be helpful to set out the relevant procedures. I've tried to address all of the questions that folks have asked me about but if I've missed something, let me know. Generally. G.S. 15A-269, -270, and -270.1 set out the procedures for a defendant's post-conviction request for DNA testing of biological evidence. Requests for post-conviction DNA testing should be made pursuant to these provisions, not the motion for appropriate relief procedures. Initiation of the proceeding. The proceeding begins when the defendant makes a motion, in the trial court that entered judgment, for DNA testing of biological evidence. Counsel. The court must appoint counsel for indigent defendants. The statute does not indicate when counsel should be appointed. The most plausible options seem to be: (1) appoint counsel only after testing is ordered; or (2) appoint counsel upon the filing of the motion. If the court chooses the second option, it may wish to have counsel file an amended motion so that the defendant's arguments for testing are asserted as clearly as possible. Evaluating the motion. The statute does not say whether a hearing is required on the motion; the statute only mentions post-test hearings, discussed below. The statute says [...]
Faculty Coordinators
