State v. Robbins
297 Neb. 503
| Neb. | 2017Background
- Robbins was sentenced to 40–60 years for second-degree murder (2003).
- In 2012 Robbins moved for postconviction relief, a new trial on newly discovered evidence, and a new trial based on DNA testing under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4120 et seq. (DNA Testing Act).
- The district court denied postconviction relief as time-barred, denied a § 29-2101(5) new trial, but granted DNA testing.
- Pharmacogenetic testing on Robbins’ cheek indicated he was an intermediate metabolizer of Zoloft; Robbins argued this could affect culpability at trial or sentencing.
- Experts testified about Zoloft’s effects and the black box warning; the district court found no causal link between metabolism status and homicide and found no exculpatory value in the DNA results.
- The Nebraska Supreme Court held the DNA Testing Act does not apply to testing Robbins’ metabolism of prescription medication and reversed with instructions to dismiss as plain error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the DNA Testing Act covers metabolism testing | Robbins argued the Act applies to metabolism testing of prescribed drugs. | State contended the Act targets identity-related DNA testing, not pharmacogenetic metabolism. | Act does not apply to metabolism testing; not exculpatory. |
| Whether metabolism evidence is exculpatory under the Act | Robbins claimed metabolism results are exculpatory and could affect guilt or sentencing. | State argued metabolism status does not exonerate/exculpate identity or guilt. | Metabolism evidence is not exculpatory under the Act. |
| Whether granting DNA testing was plain error | Robbins contends testing was warranted under the Act. | State argues testing was within discretion under the Act. | District court’s grant of DNA testing was plain error; must be dismissed. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Winslow, 274 Neb. 427 (2007) (DNA testing may be exculpatory when it excludes contributors and affects culpability)
- State v. Pratt, 287 Neb. 455 (2014) (Legislation and integrity requirements for DNA evidence)
- State v. Hernandez, 283 Neb. 423 (2012) (Legislative history on DNA testing and integrity)
- State v. Soukharith, 260 Neb. 478 (2000) (Statutory interpretation in pari materia)
- In re Estate of Morse, 248 Neb. 896 (1995) (General principles of statutory interpretation and integrity)