Opinion ID: 1810649
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Failure to require proper DNA admissibility hearing

Text: ¶ 68. Crawford alleges that counsel was ineffective for not requiring the trial court to conduct an on the record hearing pursuant to the requirements enumerated in Polk v. State, 612 So.2d 381 (Miss.1992). However, it is apparent that counsel did make a motion in limine to prevent the introduction of DNA evidence and that the court denied the motion, but not before hearing arguments by both sides and taking Polk into consideration. Also, the court's denial of the motion was affirmed on direct appeal. Not only does Crawford fail to allege what counsel specifically should have done, but this Court found that the evidence was properly admitted. Because Crawford has failed to show deficient performance or prejudice, this claim is without merit. See Woodward, 843 So.2d at 7.