Opinion ID: 1369544
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Missouri Highway Patrol report

Text: The Missouri Highway Patrol issued a report on March 21, 1990, regarding the hair analysis done by Ms. Smith. The report states: A pubic hair in the victim's pubic hair combings (# 2) and a pubic hair found in the victim's hand (# 2) were found to be foreign to the victim's pubic hair standards (# 2). These foreign hairs were compared to the suspect's pubic hair standard (# 49) and were found to be different. This report was also disclosed to Storey's trial counsel, as indicated on the acknowledgment sheet dated November 12, 1990. Storey claims that another related document was not produced by the State, which is dated July 24, 1990, and entitled Laboratory Analysis Request. That request indicates that three sexual assault kits were submitted from Mr. Cruz, Storey, and Ms. Frey. The Brief Summary of Incident section of the request states, in its entirety: MSHP lab analysis of hairs found on victim and that of suspect's hair samples do not provide positive proof linking suspect to victim. Sexual assault kit with hair samples from victim's boyfriend being submitted for comparison with hairs found on victim. The Laboratory Analysis Request indicates the same information as the report disclosed by the State. This is not exculpatory evidence. Storey did not attempt to show, during the 29.15 hearing, how he was prejudiced by not having received this document.