State v. McLean, 232 N.C. App. 111

McLean was convicted on multiple charges arising from a 2008 shooting at Club Touch in Greensboro and sought pre-trial DNA testing of shell casings under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-267(c).
The trial court denied the motion for pre-trial DNA testing but ordered fingerprint testing on the shell casings, which yielded no fingerprints matching McLean.
Defendant argued that DNA testing could show absence of his DNA and potentially exculpate him or show another perpetrator, affecting the investigation and defense.
The appellate issue is whether the trial court correctly denied pre-trial DNA testing under § 15A-267(c) based on materiality and relevance.
Defendant ultimately appealed the pre-trial denial to the North Carolina Court of Appeals; the court reviews de novo the statutory interpretation of § 15A-267(c).
The court affirms the trial court’s denial, holding the defense failed to show required materiality and that § 15A-267(c) does not authorize testing to prove absence of DNA.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 15A-267(c) requires pre-trial DNA testing here	McLean argues the shell casings meet relevance and materiality	McLean contends testing would demonstrate lack of his DNA and aid defense	No; statute not satisfied for pre-trial ordering
Whether absence of McLean's DNA on shell casings is material to defense	Presence of DNA would aid investigation; absence could support alibi	Absence could be material to alibi defense	Absence is not material under § 15A-267(c)(3)
Whether presence of DNA would be relevant but absence not material	DNA presence would identify shooter; absence could point to another	Absence provides defense value	Relevant but not material; no pre-trial order required

State v. Mackey, 209 N.C. App. 116 (2011) (statutory requirements for DNA testing; materiality standard in context of § 15A-267(c))
State v. Williams, 362 N.C. 628 (2008) (de novo review of statutory interpretation; materiality concept)