State v. Louis Seignious

Syllabus

The defendant, Louis Seignious, was convicted of first-degree murder, carrying a firearm during the commission of a crime of violence, and domestic breaking and entering. On appeal, Seignious challenged the trial justice's denial of his motion for a new trial, as well as the trial justice's determination to allow into evidence certain testimony concerning fingerprints without qualifying the witness as an expert. After careful review, the Supreme Court concluded that the trial justice employed the correct analysis for examining a motion for a new trial, properly assessed the witnesses' credibility, and did not overlook or misconceive any evidence. Moreover, expert testimony was not required when a law-enforcement officer testified that based on his professional conclusion, a person who touches an object or an existing fingerprint may leave a fingerprint or compromise an existing fingerprint, respectively. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of conviction.