Prince

Prince v. Superior Court

Good Law
10 Cal. Rptr. 2d 855·1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 1011·8 Cal. App. 4th 1176·92 Daily Journal DAR 11417·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7110
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 17, 1992D016907California1,546 words

Opinion

Opinion

Todd, J.

Cleophus Prince petitions for a writ of mandate or prohibition after the trial court ordered prosecution access to defense deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) testing of semen obtained from a vaginal swab of a murder victim.

Background

In 1990, Tiffany Shultz, Janene Weinhold, Holly Tarr and Pamela and Amber Clark were found murdered in their homes in the general Clairemont area. Police believe Prince is responsible for the five killings and a sixth homicide in another area of San Diego.

On February 16, 1990, police officers responded to a report Janene Weinhold had been found murdered in her Clairemont apartment. Investigating officers collected a semen stain from a comforter near the victim’s body. San Diego criminalist Larry Turner examined the stain and divided the sample into three parts. He believed each of the parts contained a sufficient sample for DNA typing. He forwarded one of the samples to Cellmark Diagnostics to conduct DNA analysis. He sent a second portion of the semen stain to the FBI laboratory in Washington, D.C., for DNA testing. The FBI reported the sample insufficient in size for matching purposes but perhaps usable to exclude suspects. During 1990 and…

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.