D.N.A EVidENCE; is it fAiR
ANEWly DISCOVEREd
fOR thE diStRit AtHORNEY's D-N.A ExpERT
(WhO hAPPEN tO WORK fOR thE ORANgE CONTy CRIME LAb)
to conduct A unfiNish D-N.A study ANd use it to
tEstify AGAiNst mE At tRAil. ThE UNfNiSh
pARt of
study wAs in fArOR of me
thE
D.N.A
gReAtHy.
The study
completEd dAys AftER my tRAil.

aIS it iNEffECTiVE ASSISTANCE of COUNSEl
WhEN COUNSE! KNEW ANd dId NOt
object to
UNfnish DN.A Study ctuRiNg my
tRAil, OR
,go to tRAil with infinish
EVEN
study
thAt wAs bEiNg
q uSEd As testinony by
STAtES D-n.A EYPERt.

TRAIl cOURt ERRCR /OR miscoNdUCt. Is it AllOwEd
to tEll OR ERRCR tO tE!l A jURyY whO
fOR A judge
is deAdlock 6-6 to coNtiNVE
delibERAtiNg
without CoNsE oe defeNdAnt KNowlede. AloNg
with dENiAl to A NEW tRAil MotiON of NeWly
diSCOVEREd D-N.A EVidENCE iN thE defENdAnt fAVOR
was my (f fouRtEth AmeNdmeNt violated

WhEN thE tRiE fiNdling
ON thE
lying-SpECiAl
iN-WAIT, SPECiAl CIRCIMSTANCE
ANEGATiON
Sypported br substAN
EVidENCE.
WAS NOt

Whether it is allowed for a judge to tell a jury who is biased to continue their belief in the defendant without a trial to defend against newly discovered DNA evidence