was contaminated The interests of jusu`ce therefore require new D. N, A_. testing be done.
IV.
P_ETITIONE`R requests that this Honorable Court order all entities iii custody of evidence seized in this case, whether the Hoi;r;stor_i__l>olioe Depaihrient, sorenson l=orensios, the Harris Coimty Disuict Cl_erk's O$_ce, ojr any other entity-, presently unknown to PE-TI'I'IONER, provide all evidmce obtained from the Compl_ainarit and all other evidence from which D. N.. A. may be obtained to the forensic laboratory designated b`y this Court, for new D.N. A. testing and provide to thi__s Court and the attorneys for PETITIONER and the State, a written "inventoty" or other l
written record and detonation ofthe evidence provided to the forensio laboratory for tmting.
ifthe evidenee requested herein eannot be presented for testing, the _PETII'IONER requests that this Court O`rder all entities Uouston Police Department -So_renson Forensic_s," the HauisColmty Distr'ict Clerk's OEce, etc. ..) in possession of evidence seized in this case, including but riot limited to the panties purported to have been worn by.Compla'inant and the vaginalswabspirrportedtohnvebeentaltennointhe`cotnplainant,eirplaininwritingtothi_s
Court, why such evidence cannot be presented to this Couri.
M>< 596
PE'I.'IHONER fin'the_r;requests that new buccal' swabs from-him beobtained pmsuant'to a
V.
new warrant signed by'thi's Court and that thetaking of~such swabs be done only in the-presence of'his undersigned anotney arm Laah. M. Botg.. ` vi
PE'.I'I"I`IONER theie'fore~:~requests'that this Court setthis.mat,terforaheaiingtheteon to intimate ' l. that evidence sill exists.i'n a. condition making D. N. A-.. testing possible and to detamine the nitie's ( and contact ioformation) in possession of all such evidence; 2. that the evidence in possession of such entities has to a chain of custody stinisien_t to establish that it has nnt.hsnn tampsind.with, tepinnnd, at aimed in any.ntaietial 3.that identity .is"-an issue indie\mde_rlying criminal..cas¢; v4~. that PETE["IONER was the and.as such,. would nothave beenf.i>uii¢..l guilty if exculpatory D-N. A..testing results would have been obtained; 5. the request for and performance ofnew D..fN. A. testing wouldnot- unreasonably delay the session °tPEi-moNE~it's santnissnt-ths administiannn stinan since mmon is 'Pm¢.ntly serving the~sen.ten<=e assessed in the imderiymscnmmal case;' 6. the lab Report E'om- identigene, which performed the originaf D. `N`. A.. testing in,20.05,
indicates the possibility-, if'not probability, of.cantamination.in the tesingprocedures
PETITIONER requests that this Comt; shoiild.i_t-'detennihe and order`that 'PE'I'"ITI`IONER
is not antitiadstn new D, N. insisting indicates tha taiieftaqiiasteihetein thatthi`scnmt make
P\v¢§@-i-
wriueniindiags of fact and conclusions of l`aw~a_t'the= conclusion of thehearing iii-order to
preserve any issues for appellate review.
WHE_REFORE, premises oon`sidei'ed, the PE'I"I'I'IONER'prays that this Co`ui"t giant all mhefrequested herein and for sueh'= and other relief; whether general.oi-'speei'al, a`_t:ia'w or.in 1 equity, to which this Couit deems PET?ITI.'IONER justly eni_itled-,.
LEAH.M;.Boiid '
.A'I'.I?ORNEY .FOR_ PE'I'ITIONE_ 1 TYRONE `BERRY ' 874 Yoiu