§ 8-50.1. Competency of blood tests; jury charge; taxing of expenses as costs. - North Carolina Statutes

§8‑50.1.  Competency of blood tests; jury charge; taxing of expenses ascosts.

(a)        In the trial of anycriminal action or proceeding in any court in which the question of parentagearises, regardless of any presumptions with respect to parentage, the courtbefore whom the matter may be brought, upon motion of the State or thedefendant, shall order that the alleged‑parent defendant, the knownnatural parent, and the child submit to any blood tests and comparisons whichhave been developed and adapted for purposes of establishing or disprovingparentage and which are reasonably accessible to the alleged‑parentdefendant, the known natural parent, and the child. The results of those bloodtests and comparisons, including the statistical likelihood of the allegedparent's parentage, if available, shall be admitted in evidence when offered bya duly qualified, licensed practicing physician, duly qualified immunologist,duly qualified geneticist, or other duly qualified person. Upon receipt of amotion and the entry of an order under the provisions of this subsection, thecourt shall proceed as follows:

(1)        Where the issue ofparentage is to be decided by a jury, where the results of those blood testsand comparisons are not shown to be inconsistent with the results of any otherblood tests and comparisons, and where the results of those blood tests andcomparisons indicate that the alleged‑parent defendant cannot be thenatural parent of the child, the jury shall be instructed that if they believethat the witness presenting the results testified truthfully as to thoseresults, and if they believe that the tests and comparisons were conductedproperly, then it will be their duty to decide that the alleged‑parent isnot the natural parent; whereupon, the court shall enter the special verdict ofnot guilty; and

(2)        By requiring theState or defendant, as the case may be, requesting the blood tests andcomparisons pursuant to this subsection to initially be responsible for any ofthe expenses thereof and upon the entry of a special verdict incorporating afinding of parentage or nonparentage, by taxing the expenses for blood testsand comparisons, in addition to any fees for expert witnesses allowed per G.S.7A‑314 whose testimonies supported the admissibility thereof, as costs inaccordance with G.S. 7A‑304; G.S. Chapter 6, Article 7; or G.S. 7A‑315,as applicable.

(b)        Repealed by SessionLaws 1993, c. 333, s. 2.

(b1)      In the trial of anycivil action in which the question of parentage arises, the court shall, onmotion of a party, order the mother, the child, and the alleged father‑defendantto submit to one or more blood or genetic marker tests, to be performed by aduly certified physician or other expert. The court shall require the personrequesting the blood or genetic marker tests to pay the costs of the tests. Thecourt may, in its discretion, tax as part of costs the expenses for blood orgenetic marker tests and comparisons. Verified documentary evidence of thechain of custody of the blood specimens obtained pursuant to this subsectionshall be competent evidence to establish the chain of custody.  Any partyobjecting to or contesting the procedures or results of the blood or geneticmarker tests shall file with the court written objections setting forth the basisfor the objections and shall serve copies thereof upon all other parties notless than 10 days prior to any hearing at which the results may be introducedinto evidence.  The person contesting the results of the blood or geneticmarker tests has the right to subpoena the testing expert pursuant to the Rulesof Civil Procedure.  If no objections are filed within the time and mannerprescribed, the test results are admissible as evidence of paternity withoutthe need for foundation testimony or other proof of authenticity or accuracy. The results of the blood or genetic marker tests shall have the followingeffect:

(1)        If the court findsthat the conclusion of all the experts, as disclosed by the evidence based uponthe test, is that the probability of the alleged parent's parentage is lessthan eighty‑five percent (85%), the alleged parent is presumed not to bethe parent and the evidence shall be admitted.  This presumption may berebutted only by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence;

(2)        If the experts disagreein their findings or conclusions, the question of paternity shall be submittedupon all the evidence;

(3)        If the tests showthat the alleged parent is not excluded and that the probability of the allegedparent's parentage is between eighty‑five percent (85%) and ninety‑sevenpercent (97%), this evidence shall be admitted by the court and shall beweighed with other competent evidence;

(4)        If the expertsconclude that the genetic tests show that the alleged parent is not excludedand that the probability of the alleged parent's parentage is ninety‑sevenpercent (97%) or higher, the alleged parent is presumed to be the parent andthis evidence shall be admitted.  This presumption may be rebutted only byclear, cogent, and convincing evidence. (1949, c. 51; 1965, c. 618; 1975, c. 449, ss. 1, 2;1979, c. 576, s. 1; 1993, c. 333, s. 2; 1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 733, s. 1.)