Mr. EISENBERG. Could you approximate the number of fingerprint examinations you have made? Mr. LATONA. Frankly, no. There have been so many in that time that I would not be able to give even a good guess. Mr. EISENBERG. Would the figure run in the thousands or hundreds? Mr. LATONA. So far as comparisons are concerned, in the millions. Mr. EISENBERG. Have you testified in court? Mr. LATONA. I have testified in Federal courts, State courts, commissioners' hearings, military courts, and at deportation proceedings. Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chief Justice, I ask that this witness be accepted as an expert. The CHAIRMAN. The witness is qualified. Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you briefly outline for us the theory of fingerprint identification? Mr. LATONA. The principle of fingerprint identification is based on the fact primarily that the ridge formations that appear on the hands and on the soles of the feet actually are created approximately 2 to 3 months before birth, on the unborn child, and they remain constant in the same position in which they are formed until the person is dead and the body is consumed by decomposition. Secondly, the fact that no two people, or no two fingers of the same person, have the same arrangement of these ridge formations, either on the fingers, the palms, or the soles and toes of the feet. Plus the fact that during the lifetime of a person this ridge formation does not change, it remains constant--from the time it is formed until actual destruction, either caused by voluntary or involuntary means, or upon the death of the body and decomposition. Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, do you have any personal experience indicating the uniqueness of fingerprints? Mr. LATONA. Yes; I do. My experience is based primarily upon the work which I have actually done in connection with my work with the FBI. I have had the experience of working on one case in particular in which millions of comparisons were actually and literally made with a small portion of a fingerprint which was left on a piece of evidence in connection with this particular case, which was a kidnapping case. This fragmentary latent print which we developed consisted of approximately seven to eight points. Most fingerprints will have in them an average roughly of from 85 to about 125. This fragmentary latent print was compared with literally millions of single impressions for the purpose of trying to effect an identification. And we were unable, over a lengthy period while we were making these millions of comparisons, not able to identify these few fragmentary points.