In the News


Andrea Roth in the news:



News Buzz: Advances in DNA testing

Andrea Roth interviewed by Iowa Public Radio, December 6, 2013

“It’s certainly given them an added powerful tool. Every day you hear media reports about cold cases being solved by DNA, but a lot depends on the case. I don’t think many people necessarily realize that a DNA match doesn’t mean that it’s definitely the DNA of the person whose DNA is found at a crime scene from 20 years ago.”


Inside a dysfunctional Contra Costa jury

Andrea Roth quoted in Contra Costa Times, September 28, 2013

Andrea Roth, a UC Berkeley law school professor specializing in criminal law and procedure, said a disgruntled, contentious jury is not necessarily bad. “We’re a pluralist society and disagree on all sorts of things, and that’s part of the beauty of it,” she said. “Deliberations are supposed to be heated and passionate; that’s why (judges) don’t venture too much into the box. … Jurors are not supposed to check their common sense at the door; they are supposed to bring their life experiences to the deliberations.”


Stand-your-ground the rule in state, courts affirm

Andrea Roth quoted in San Francisco Chronicle, April 15, 2012

Most states had similar rules until 30 or 40 years ago, when some passed laws barring a claim of self-defense outside the home if the person could have fled safely, said Andrea Roth, a UC Berkeley law professor…. “California’s law perpetuates the old frontier rule,” she said. “This is not some new brainchild of the NRA.”


Andrea Roth Says Judge’s DNA Opinion Merits Public Scrutiny

Daily Journal, February 28, 2012 by John Roemer
http://bit.ly/A60s22 (registration required)

“Judge Karlton’s analysis is significant in part because it unearths problematic details about the way the statute actually operates,” Roth said, “such as that the federal regulations have no provision for comparing the arrestee’s DNA profile to future arrestee profiles for identification purposes, that federal officials do in fact retain samples indefinitely, and that the law does not require federal officials ever to destroy the sample, even after dismissal or acquittal.”


David Sklansky, Andrea Roth Weigh in on Mirkarimi Case

San Francisco Chronicle, January 20, 2012 by Bob Egelko
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/01/19/MNKL1MRPVJ.DTL

Lopez went to her neighbor a day after the New Year’s Eve incident, but prosecutors might be able to show she was still traumatized when she made the taped statements, said David Sklansky, a UC Berkeley law professor.

Lopez’s recorded statements about her physical pain and alleged fears of her husband might be allowed in court, under that hearsay exception, but an account of how she was injured probably wouldn’t be, said Andrea Roth, another Berkeley law professor.