Where a defendant challenged the denial of his motion for relief based on post-conviction DNA testing, the motion court applied the proper standard, and the judgment is affirmed because the DNA evidence did not overcome the unequivocal identifications in the case, and the court did not err in admitting testimony regarding other crimes because the defendant was not prejudiced, and the court did not err in discounting expert testimony.
Judgment is affirmed.
State v. Dixon (MLW No. 73809/Case No. WD81592 – 20 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District, Mitchell, J.) Appealed from circuit court, Johnson County, Wagner, J. (Tricia J. Bushnell, Kansas City, Missouri, and Adnan Sultan, New York, for appellant) (Eric S. Schmitt, Shaun J. Mackelprang and Karen L. Kramer, Jefferson City, for respondent).