Alejandro Dominguez

• Alibi

● Three witnesses testified that defendant was not at the scene of the crime.

“Q: Did you see [the victim] on September 19, 1989 A: No.”

• Eyewitness
• Forensic Evidence

• Serology

• Invalid

The victim was a B secretor and Dominguez was an O secretor. Two stains had B and H antigens, consistent with the victim. The analyst testified that Dominquez could not be eliminated and that type O secretors are 36 percent of the population. Due to masking, none in the population could be eliminated. For another stain, the testimony was valid, where having detected only H antigens, the victim could be eliminated but Dominguez could not. See Part II.A.1 for a description of the problem of masking and non-quantification and discussion of similar cases.

• Cross Racial Identification
• Victim

• Mug shots
• Photo array
• Showup

Yes ● Show-up ● Suggestive remarks Brady – “the criminal prosecutor testified that he was never told about any showup used in [victim’s] identification of Dominguez.”

Police told the victim, “Watch the one sitting on the chair. Tell me if that is the one that hit you.” The building security guard “had gotten him to come downstairs. I walked by when he was in the security office. I walked by and identified him.”

No ● Discrepancies in description – height and pierced ear

Victim described the rapist as about 5’8” with curly black hair and a “diamond studded earring.”