Due Process Rights-Expert Testimony

Listen to this article

WI Court of Appeals – District III

Case Name: State of Wisconsin v. Jeffrey Donald Lundell

Case No.: 2023AP002270-CR

Officials: Stark, P.J., Hruz and Gill, JJ.

Focus: Due Process Rights-Expert Testimony

Lundell appealed his conviction for possession of methamphetamine, arguing that false testimony at trial violated his due process rights, and alternatively, seeking a new trial in the interest of justice. The case arose from a traffic stop where law enforcement found methamphetamine in a camera bag belonging to Rachel Peyer. DNA testing on several gem bags found in the bag implicated Lundell, though DNA analysis was inconclusive on whether it was transferred via direct or secondary contact. At trial, the State’s expert testified that secondary DNA transfer was unlikely, though she conceded she couldn’t rule it out.

Lundell later filed a postconviction motion claiming the expert’s testimony was false, as the lab did not test for DNA from other possible sources, like saliva or blood. He argued that secondary transfer could have occurred from items like a razor found in the camera bag. A forensic expert, Dr. Alan Friedman, supported this view, disagreeing with the trial expert’s conclusions.

The circuit court denied the motion, concluding that the testimony did not constitute falsehoods but rather a difference of opinion. It also found no reasonable likelihood that the testimony affected the trial outcome. Lundell’s ineffective assistance claim was also rejected due to his failure to present trial counsel’s testimony at the postconviction hearing.

Affirmed.

Decided 12/17/24

Full Text