Opinion ID: 2267917
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Anderson v. State

Text: Anderson's case presents an example where the failure to pursue DNA testing at the time of trial forecloses relief under § 4504(a). At a hearing held before his 1996 trial, Anderson was asked to take a position on whether to seek additional DNA testing of the blood samples found on his gloves, boots, and screwdriver. Anderson made the strategic decision not to pursue additional testing for fear that the test results would be incriminating. [27] By adopting that strategy, Anderson lost the opportunity to seek post-conviction DNA testing under the statute. The consequences of Anderson's trial tactic flow not from a general theory of waiver, but from the statute's requirements. Under § 4504(a)(2), a petitioner is eligible to seek post-conviction DNA testing only if [t]he evidence was not previously subject to testing because the technology for testing was not available at the time of the trial.... If the reason that DNA testing was not undertaken at trial was not because the testing was unavailable, but because the petitioner did not want to risk an unfavorable result, the petitioner cannot satisfy § 4504(a)(2). [28]