investi gation has expanded considerably and proves significant to the in vestigation of crime by means of DNA fingerprinting techniques, and the exploitation of DNA polymorphisms to detect inheritance patterns of disease-associated genes.
Matta counters that the DNA extraction procedure varies among the attendant laboratories, despite a constant theoretical pro cess.5 Whether or not different procedures to extract DNA are used, the objectives remain the same. That is, the extraction of DNA is to yield the nuclear DNA from cells, isolating the residue, and then purifying it to produce a substance that is totally lack ing in cellular proteins. It is this process that allows investi gators to utilize DNA fingerprinting.
While scientists have used DNA to identify diseases and inherited genes for decades, only recently has attention turned to the use of this laboratory procedure for the purposes of identify ing the fathers in paternity cases.6 This occurred during the 19 70s, and was later followed by the acceptance of DNA fingerprint ing in other types of criminal cases. In fact, during the late 1980s, Florida's 5th District Court of Appeals was the first court to uphold the admissibility of DNA fingerprinting regarding the prosecution of a defendant in a criminal case. As a result, Tom mie Lee Andrews was convicted of aggravated battery, sexual batte ry and armed burglary of a woman who resided in Orlando. To con vict Andrews, samples of his blood were taken and the DNA in it were compared to the DNA found in the semen in the victim. In support of this contention: "The Florida appeals court upheld the admission of the evidence against Andrews, saying 'evidence derived from DNA print identification appears based on proven scientific principles.'"7
The first test case using DNA was not done in the United States, however, with Great Britain forging the way in using this form of identification. The subject was a young m...