Why are recent court rulings addressing the admissibility of DNA evidence in the courtroom significant?
What will be an ideal response?
As time goes on, there will undoubtedly be significant legal and scientific challenges to the application of DNA technology in crime solving. Certainly, however, as the "bugs" are worked out, society as a whole will be the beneficiary of this captivating science, which enables virtually positive identification of both criminal suspects and their victims.
You might also like to view...
Self-defense as a justification defense requires that the defendant was in imminent danger.
Answer the following statement true (T) or false (F)
The Supreme Court ruled in _____ that defendants in capital cases have the right to representation that meets an "objective standard of reasonableness."
A. Furman v. Georgia (1972) B. Strickland v. Washington (1984) C. McCleskey v. Kemp (1987) D. Payne v. Tennessee (1991) E. Witherspoon v. Illinois (1968)
In ____________, the court process is aimed at sparing nondangerous offenders from the stigma and labeling of a criminal conviction and further involvement with the justice process
A) diversion B) ?incapacitation C) ?restoration D) ?rehabilitation E) ?equity
According to Pennsylvania Board of Pardons and Parole v. Scott (1998), improperly obtained evidence cannot be used at parole revocation proceedings
a. True b. False Indicate whether the statement is true or false