Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Forensics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Prosecutor presents fingerprint comparisons and certified prior judgments tying records to defendant
Summary
At the punishment phase, a district investigator testified he compared ink prints taken from Joseph Charles Freeman to jail and judgment records, and certified judgments for evading arrest and aggravated robbery were admitted as evidence connecting prior convictions to the defendant.
During the punishment stage, the State called Investigator Steven Hinton, who testified about fingerprint comparison procedures and how he linked prior judgments to the defendant. Hinton said he compared defendants' ink impressions (State's Exhibit 89) to the sheriff's booking prints (State's Exhibit 85) and to prints on certified judgments and found they were "one and the same," citing matching state identification numbers, names and dates of birth.
The State also offered certified judgments admitted as State's Exhibits 86, 87 and 88. Investigator Hinton described one judgment (cause F22-3098-462) as an evading-arrest conviction that resulted in deferred probation and identified two aggravated-robbery judgments from the 252nd District Court of Jefferson County with 60-year sentences listed in the documents. The investigator explained that when a usable fingerprint was not present on a prior judgment, he relied on SID, name and DOB to confirm linkage.
