People v. Prante

This case presents question as to whether trial court properly denied defendant leave to file successive post-conviction petition that challenged his murder conviction on ground that trial court had improperly admitted unreliable bite mark evidence where forensic science has now repudiated bite mark comparisons that were made at defendant’s trial. Appellate Court, in reversing trial court, found that defendant’s successive post-conviction petition that alleged cause and prejudice arising out of use of bite mark evidence did not fail as matter of law, where law regarding admissibility of scientific evidence has developed to point where bite mark evidence would now be considered “scientific evidence” that must undergo Frye analysis. As such, defendant’s petition made prima facie showing of cause and prejudice that required trial court to perform Frye analysis regarding scope, if at all, of bite mark evidence that purportedly linked defendant to victim.