PORTLAND (AP) – A divided Supreme Judicial Court on Tuesday set the stage for a DNA analysis of evidence arising from a Kennebec County rape 10 years ago for which a Monmouth man is serving a 15-year prison term.

Brushing aside a lower court ruling, the 4-2 supreme court majority concluded that Daniel Donovan’s motion for post-conviction DNA analysis met the requirements of Maine law. The case marked the first time that the court addressed the 2003 statute.

A jury found Donovan guilty in 1996 of gross sexual assault and three other crimes and the supreme court subsequently upheld the convictions. Donovan, 40, is being held at the Charleston Correctional Facility. With time off for good behavior, his earliest projected release date is in December, according to the Department of Corrections.

The victim of the June 22, 1994, rape identified Donovan, her boyfriend, as her assailant; Donovan denied having had sex with the woman during the time period in question and in his motion for DNA analysis contended that she had consensual intercourse with another person prior to a hospital visit hours later where evidence was preserved.

The question dividing the court was whether the DNA evidence was material to the issue of Donovan’s identity as the rapist.

The state argued that Donovan was the only person with the victim at the time of the alleged rape and that a finding of semen that was other than his would not exonerate him.

Donovan contended that such evidence could advance his claim that he did not rape the woman and that she tried to frame him by having consensual sex with someone else.

The court’s majority concluded that identity may be at issue during a trial even when the alleged victim identifies only the defendant as the perpetrator but the defendant claims no crime was committed.

The two dissenting justices sided with the lower court on the identity issue, saying the post-conviction DNA statute requires Donovan to show that his identity as perpetrator was contested during the trial.

The minority opinion said that even if the evidence were tested and the semen was shown to be from someone other than Donovan, he does not assert that the source of the semen committed a crime.

“The Legislature would not intend that costly DNA analysis should be conducted without a reasonable chance that results favorable to a defendant would lead to a new trial,” the dissenting opinion said.

Donovan’s lawyer, Andrews Campbell of Waldoboro, hailed the court ruling as “a significant victory for people who want DNA testing.”

Campbell said the court rejected the state’s narrow interpretation of the law that would “severely limit the rights of a person who may be factually innocent from establishing that through DNA testing.”

AP-ES-06-29-04 1436EDT