Abstract
The New Mexico Supreme Court recently considered whether a trial court had erred in excluding behavioral genetic evidence of a murder defendant's low-activity monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) gene, which the defendant argued had predisposed him-along with his history of childhood maltreatment-to "maladaptive or violent behavior." After an extensive analysis of the underlying science and its relevance to the case, the supreme court held unanimously that the trial judge had the discretion to exclude the MAOA evidence. The court's analysis provides insights into how other courts are likely to rule on the relevance of behavioral genetic evidence.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
