DeFrancesC. J., “Prosecutors in State Courts, 2001,”Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin (2002): At 8–9.
2.
Id.
3.
JoblingM. A.GillP., “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis,”Nature Reviews5, no. 5 (2004): 739–751.
4.
GiannelliP., “Forensic Science,”Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics33, no. 3 (2005): 535–544, at 535–536.
5.
BieberF. R., “Science and Technology of Forensic DNA Profiling: Current Use and Future Directions,” in LazerD., ed., DNA and the Criminal Justice System: The Technology of Justice (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2004): 23–62; GillP., “DNA as Evidence: The Technology of Identification,”New England Journal of Medicine352, no. 26 (2005): 2669–2671.
ReillyP., “Legal and Public Policy Issues in DNA Forensics,”Nature Reviews2, no. 2 (2001): 313–317.
8.
LovrichN. P., National Forensic DNA Study Report: Final Report, National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, 2003; National Institute of Justice, Report to the Attorney General on Delays in Forensic DNA Analysis, National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, 2003 [hereinafter cited as NIJ].
9.
See Lovrich, Id.
10.
Id.; see NIJ, supra note 8; ZedlewskiE.MurphyM. B., “DNA Analysis for ‘Minor’ Crimes: A Major Benefit for Law Enforcement,”National Institute of Justice Journal253 (January, 2006): 2–5.
11.
See Lovrich, supra note 8; International Association of Chiefs of Police, DNA Evidence: Enhancing Law Enforcement's Impact from Crime Scene to Courtroom and Beyond, Summit Final Report, vol. 1, U.S. Department of Justice, Philadelphia, PA, 2003.
12.
For a description of the origin of the John Doe Warrant and related policy issues, see ImwinkelreidE. J., “The Relative Priority That Should Be Assigned to Trial Stage DNA Issues,” in Lazer, supra note 5, at 94–95; see also GahnN., “The Wisconsin John Doe Warrant,” and “An Update on John Doe DNA Profile Arrest Warrants,”available at <http://www.denverda.org/DNA_Documents/Gahn2.pdf> (last visited March 29, 2007).