The Indiana Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a man accused of of child molestation. His court challenge was based on the US Supreme Court’s Melendez-Diaz decision concerning the right to confront one’s accuser when it comes to forensic and scientific evidence, such as in DNA reports.
The original case hinged on DNA evidence that he had been the father of the fetus of the 13 year old victim.
In the Melendez-Diaz decision, which was the basis of the challenge, the defendant did not have any ability to challenge the forensic evidence, which in this case was the identification of cocaine as an illegal substance. No live expert testimony was used to support the documentation, so there was no opportunity to challenge the facts presented. This violated the confrontation clause of the 6th amendment of the Constitution.
However, in this case, in a 3-2 vote the justices ruled that his rights had not been violated. There were two experts who testified to the validity of the DNA evidence, and the process used. One was the supervisor of the actual DNA technician who performed the test, and the other was an expert on DNA evidence.
The defense claimed that this testimony was insufficient, since the specific lab tech who analyzed the evidence did not testify. A two justice minority agreed with this point.
Under Indiana criminal penalties, the defendant was sentenced to a term of 65 years in prison.