State v. Dixon
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
STONEBURNER, Judge.
Appellant was charged with first-degree burglary based primarily on finger- and palm-print evidence collected at the scene. Appellant requested a Frye-Mack hearing to determine the admissibility of evidence that he is the source of the prints found. After a four-day Frye-Mack hearing, the district court concluded that the state had met its burden to establish that friction-ridge-print identification using the ACE-V methodology is generally accepted by experts in the field as reliable and that the examiner in this case complied with the appropriate standards and…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
- State v. MacKSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- People v. JenningsIllinois Supreme Court · 1911
- State v. AndersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
- State v. KolanderSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- People v. O.D.California Court of Appeal · 2013
- State v. HightowerMissouri Court of Appeals · 2017
- State of Minnesota v. Justin Dillard ThomasCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2017
- Lewis v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2015
- State of Minnesota v. Rashad Devon MickelsonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2016