Bill Summaries: S425 CLARIFY DNA RESULT WOULD HAVE CHANGED VERDICT.

Tracking:
  • Summary date: Jun 12 2019 - More information

    House committee substitute to the 2nd edition makes the following changes.

    Amends GS 15A-269(b) by clarifying that the court is to grant the motion for DNA testing and, if testing complies with FBI requirements, the run of any profiles obtained from the testing, upon determining all of the three specified items. 

    Amends GS 15A-1469 by adding that the new provision requiring a motion for appropriate relief to be considered by the senior judge of the three-judge panel if the motion is filed any time within one year of the denied relief, is notwithstanding GS 15A-1413 (trial judges empowered to act; assignment of motions for appropriate relief). Makes additional clarifying changes.

    Makes the entire act effective when it becomes law and applicable to motions pending or filed on or after that date (was, changes to GS 15A-1469 were effective December 1, 2019). 


  • Summary date: May 8 2019 - More information

    Senate amendment #3 makes the following changes to the 1st edition, as amended.

    Further amends GS 15A-269(b), requiring a court to grant a motion for postconviction DNA testing and run DNA profiles upon determining, among other required findings, that if the DNA testing being requested had been conducted on the evidence with favorable results, those results would give support to the defendant's innocence claim (was, there exists a reasonable probability that the verdict would have been different). Makes conforming changes to the act's long title.


  • Summary date: May 6 2019 - More information

    Senate amendment #2 adds the following to the 1st edition.

    Amends GS 15A-1469, concerning three-judge panel review following a finding by either the Innocence Inquiry Commission or the district attorney and the convicted person's counsel agree pursuant to specified state law that there is sufficient evidence of factual innocence to merit judicial review. Establishes that if a claimant is denied relief by the three-judge panel and files a motion for appropriate relief pursuant to Article 89 within one year of the denied relief, the motion is to be considered by the senior judge of the three-judge panel. Makes conforming changes to the act's long title.


  • Summary date: Mar 28 2019 - More information

    Amends GS 15A-269, as title indicates.


© 2022 School of Government The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

This work is copyrighted and subject to "fair use" as permitted by federal copyright law. No portion of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the express written permission of the publisher. Distribution by third parties is prohibited. Prohibited distribution includes, but is not limited to, posting, e-mailing, faxing, archiving in a public database, installing on intranets or servers, and redistributing via a computer network or in printed form. Unauthorized use or reproduction may result in legal action against the unauthorized user.

Printer-friendly: Click to view