Pizarro

In 1990, defendant and appellant Michael A. Pizarro was convicted of murder, forcible lewd or lascivious act on a child under age 14, and forcible rape. The case, now on appeal for the second time, presents an unusual procedural posture. In the first appeal, Pizarro contended the DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) evidence against him was inadmissible because the prosecution had failed to demonstrate that the DNA restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) testing conducted by the FBI was generally accepted in the scientific community. At that time, the admissibility of DNA evidence was still being debated, evaluated, and resolved by appellate review. We remanded the case for a thorough evidentiary ( Kelly [1] ) hearing. ( People v. Pizarro (1992) 10 Cal. App.4th 57 , 12 Cal.Rptr.2d 436 ( Pizarro I ).) That Kelly hearing is the basis of this opinion. In 1998, the trial court again ruled that the DNA was admissible.

During the years since trial, significant case law has developed. In 1991, People v. Axell (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 836 , 1 Cal. Rptr.2d 411 was decided, followed by People v. Barney (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 798 , 10 Cal.Rptr.2d 731 in 1992. And, shortly after the…