United States v. Graves

465 F. Supp. 2d 450 (E.D. Pa. 2006)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D allegedly entered a Bank, displayed a handgun, vaulted over the teller counter, and stole $6,421 in cash. D was charged in an indictment with one count of armed bank robbery and one count of using a firearm during the commission of a violent felony. The robber was allegedly carrying an umbrella that he moved to shield his face. The Assistant Manager positively identified D as the robber from a photo array. The physical evidence includes: (1) the umbrella that the robber allegedly carried and discarded at the bank; (2) impressions of the treads of both sneakers allegedly worn by the robber that were lifted from the teller counter; (3) a pair of New Balance sneakers seized at D's girlfriend's residence; and (4) DNA samples taken from D. P plans to call a forensic DNA expert to testify to her comparison of D's DNA to DNA recovered from the sneakers and umbrella; and (2) an expert on shoe print comparison to testify to his comparison of the counter impressions to impressions taken of the New Balance sneaker treads. A Forensic Shoeprint/Tiretread Examiner at the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) submitted a report that one of the footwear impressions lifted from the counter 'corresponds in design and approximate physical size' with the left New Balance sneaker, and one patterned impression lifted from the counter 'shares similar design features with the respective portion' of the right New Balance sneaker. According to the DNA Report, the examiner employed PCR/STR typing to compare the sneaker DNA to D's DNA. Each sneaker disclosed the presence of DNA from three or more individuals. It goes on to explain that the probability of selecting an unrelated individual at random from a general population who could be a potential contributor ('random match probability') to the mixture of DNA detected on the left sneaker is approximately 1 in 2,900 from the African American population, while the random match probability is approximately 1 in 3,600 with respect to the right sneaker. The DNA from the umbrella was compared to D's DNA. The PCR/STR typing results from the umbrella DNA sample disclosed the presence of DNA from more than one individual. The random match probability with respect to the DNA detected on the umbrella is approximately 1 in 2 from the African American population. D argues that because of the low statistical significance of the DNA evidence, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice and confusion of the issues under Federal Rule of Evidence 403.