Whitton v. Dixon · ¶6

To answer that question, the Court of Appeals did something peculiar: It considered not only the evidence that was presented to the jury at Whitton's trial, but also evidence the jury never saw. The evidence in question relates to blood stains on Whitton's boots, which were seized the day after the murder. At Whitton's trial, an analyst from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement testified that the DNA in the blood stains matched neither the victim's nor Whitton's. A decade after Whitton was convicted, however, the State ran another DNA test on the blood stains—and this time, the results revealed a match with the victim's DNA. Even though that new DNA evidence was not presented at Whitton's trial, the Court of Appeals took account of it when analyzing the Florida Supreme Court's determination. In describing the evidence that supported that determination, the Court of Appeals related…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.