Hill

People v. Hill

Good Law
107 Cal. Rptr. 2d 110·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 358·2001 Daily Journal DAR 4821·89 Cal. App. 4th 48·2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3984
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 16, 2001B143524California4,228 words

Opinion

Opinion

Yegan, J.

Ten years ago in People v. Axell (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 836 [ 1 Cal.Rptr.2d 411 ], in an opinion authored by Presiding Justice Stone, we were the first California appellate court to approve the use of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) typing evidence to prove identity in a criminal case. Since then, the scientific methodology, while fundamentally the same, has become more refined and sophisticated. As of 1999, the “state of the art” was the Profiler Plus DNA test kit which here was used to prove identity. As we shall explain, this specific test kit does not embrace any new scientific technique requiring a first prong Kelly hearing. (People v. Kelly (1976) 17 Cal.3d 24 [ 130 Cal.Rptr. 144 , 549 P.2d 1240 ].)

Jonathan Lamonte Hill appeals from the judgment after a jury convicted him of residential burglary (count 1; Pen. Code, § 459), rape (count 2; § 261, subd. (a)(2), forcible oral copulation (count 3; § 288a, subd. (c)(2)), forcible sodomy (count 4; § 286, subd. (a)), and anal and genital penetration by a foreign object (count 5; § 289, subd. (a)(1)). The jury found that he used a deadly weapon, a knife, in the commission of counts 2 through 5 (§ 12022.3, subd. (a)) and that…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.