Samuel Gayden v. Illinois

I Whether the State misused DNA evidence to link Petitioner to the weapon used in the offense, and to alleged threatening letters sent from the Cook County Jail, where that DNA evidence could not be scientifically matched to Petitioner, should have been barred, and was instead used to mislead the Jury. II Whether the admission of multiple lay opinions of identification, from non-eyewitnesses to the offenses, was error depriving Petitioner of a fair trial, particularly given the Circuit Court’s demonstrated pre-judgment of the issue. Ill Whether the admission of Brian Murdock’s prior oral and written statements into evidence, the latter substantively, was error where the admission of those statements did not comply with prevailing law, either as impeachment evidence or for substantive use, and the admission played on the Jury’s improper tendency to credit evidence that simply is repeated. IV Whether trial counsel was ineffective where she repeatedly failed to protect Petitioner’s rights, allowing improper evidence before the Jury, and failing to place other evidence in context, thus depriving Petitioner of a fair Jury trial.