People v. Robinson
- Area
- criminal
- Panel
- George (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
72 Cal.Rptr.3d 621 (2008) 177 P.3d 230 PEOPLE v. ROBINSON (Paul Eugene).
No. S158528. Supreme Court of California.
February 12, 2008. Petition for review granted (criminal case).
The petition for review is granted. The issues to be briefed and argued are limited to the following issues and any issues fairly subsumed within them:
1) Does the issuance of a "John Doe" complaint and arrest warrant timely commence a criminal action and thereby satisfy the statute of limitations?
2) Does an unknown suspect's DNA profile satisfy the "particularity" requirement for an arrest warrant?
3) What remedy is there, if any, for the unlawful collection of genetic material under the DNA and Forensic Identification Data Base and Data Bank Act of 1998 (Pen.Code, section 295 et seq.)? Briefing on the following issue is deferred pending consideration and disposition of a related issue in People v. Nelson, S147051: Is the methodology for assessing the statistical significance of a "cold hit" from a DNA database a novel scientific question requiring proof of general scientific acceptance under People v. Kelly (1976) 17 Cal.3d 24[, 130 Cal.Rptr. 144, 549 P.2d 1240]?
GEORGE, C.J., and KENNARD, BAXTER, WERDEGAR, CHIN, MORENO, and CORRIGAN, JJ., concur.
Cites, in this corpus
- In Re Dannenberg S158880 · 2008-02-12
- People v. Kelly Crim. 19028 · 1976-05-28
Cited by
- In Re Dannenberg S158880 · 2008-02-12