Opinion · Orlaw Oregon

STATE v. FUTCH, 324 Or. 297 (1996)

924 P.2d 832

Type
Opinion
Court
Orlaw Oregon
Jurisdiction
Orlaw
Date
1996-10-11
Topic
general

STATE v. FUTCH, 324 Or. 297 (1996) 924 P.2d 832 STATE OF OREGON, Respondent on Review, v. HERBERT JACKSON FUTCH, Petitioneron Review. CC88-1270; CA A67775; SC S41127Oregon Supreme Court.Argued and submitted January 10, 1995; Reassigned July 8,Decision of the Court of Appeals circuit court affirmed October 11, 1996 On review from the Court of Appeals.[fn*] [fn*] Appeal from Clatsop County Circuit Court, Charles Luukinen, Judge. 123 Or. App. 176, 860 P.2d 264 (1993).

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed STATE v. FUTCH, 324 Or. 297 (1996). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

STATE v. FUTCH,324 Or. 297(1996)
924 P.2d 832
STATE OF OREGON,Respondent on Review,v. HERBERT JACKSON FUTCH,Petitioner
on Review.
CC88-1270; CA A67775; SC S41127
Oregon Supreme Court.
Argued and submitted January 10, 1995;
Reassigned July 8,
Decision of the Court of Appeals circuit court affirmed October 11, 1996
On review from the Court of Appeals.fn*
Sally L. Avera, Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause on behalf of petitioner on review. With her on the petition for review was David K. Allen, Deputy Public Defender, Salem.

Janet A. Metcalf, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause on behalf of respondent on review. With her on the response brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.
Before Carson, Chief Justice, and Gillette, Van Hoomissen, Fadeley, and Graber, Justices.fn**
PER CURIAMPage 298

The decision of the Court of Appeals and the judgment of the circuit court are affirmed.Page 299
PER CURIAM
Defendant appeals his convictions for aggravated murder and sodomy in the first degree. He contends that the trial court erred in allowing the admission of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) evidence using the Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism (RFLP) method. The trial court held that that scientific technique satisfied the standard for the admissibility of scientific evidence articulated by this court inState v. Brown,297 Or. 404,687 P.2d 751(1984). The Court of Appeals affirmed.State v. Futch,123 Or. App. 176,860 P.2d 264(1993). The sole issue on review is whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court's ruling admitting the state's RFLP DNA evidence. It did not.See State v. Lyons,324 Or. 256,261n 7,924 P.2d 802(1996) (discussing admissibility of DNA evidence).

The decision of the Court of Appeals and the judgment of the circuit court are affirmed.Page 300
  1. Appeal from Clatsop County Circuit Court, Charles Luukinen, Judge.123 Or. App. 176,860 P.2d 264(1993). ↩
  2. Unis, J., retired June 30, 1996, and did not participate in this decision. Durham, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case. ↩