State v. Bailey

Summary

The court held that Bailey could not obtain postconviction forensic DNA testing because issue-preclusion principles barred him from relitigating prior determinations that the State did not possess biological material related to his convictions. The court also exercised discretion to consider the State's preclusion argument for the first time on appeal because the issue presented a dispositive question of law based on undisputed court records. The court affirmed the district court's denial of Bailey's petition on that alternative ground.