Gene Sterling Taylor, 2015 Baker County rape plea, seeks new DNA test

A Baker County inmate who pleaded guilty to two counts of first-degree rape in 2015 has asked the court to order fresh DNA testing of an evidence sample from the victim, a move that has prompted a dispute between defense counsel and the district attorney and that could affect public trust in local prosecutions.

Gene Sterling Taylor, 32, is serving a sentence at the Oregon State Penitentiary after being sentenced in January 2015 to almost 17 years in prison. The Oregon Department of Corrections lists his earliest release date as May 8, 2031. Taylor filed a motion in May 2024 seeking new DNA tests on an evidence sample that was tested in 2015; he contends that modern testing would prove his innocence.

Baker County District Attorney Greg Baxter responded by filing a motion on Dec. 29, 2025, asking the court to deny Taylor’s request. Baxter wrote in his motion, “This motion appears to be another last grasp at relief,” and added, “Given the fact that the evidence was already tested, the motion should be denied.” Baxter’s filing also states the sample was tested in 2015 and notes that Taylor pleaded guilty before those test results were available and before trial.

At a hearing in Baker County Circuit Court on Jan. 29, Judge Leslie Roberts scheduled a further hearing for oral argument on March 16 at 1:30 p.m. Erik Eklund of Portland, who represents Taylor, and Baxter are slated to present arguments at that hearing. The court has not released, in the filings cited, detailed technical information about the 2015 testing such as which laboratory performed the analysis or which DNA methodology was used.

The dispute highlights a broader forensic question: advances in DNA testing have changed what laboratories can detect. “STR tests have largely replaced RFLP tests in criminal cases, according to the National Institute of Justice.” That shift is central to why post-conviction testing motions are increasingly filed nationwide, and why local residents may see this case as part of a larger discussion about technological change and justice.

For Baker County, the case has local consequences beyond courtroom procedure. Prosecutors, defense counsel, victims and neighbors will watch how the court balances finality of guilty pleas against claims of potential innocence invoked by newer science. The March 16 hearing will determine whether oral argument proceeds and whether a judge will permit retesting that could reopen factual questions from the 2015 prosecution.

Residents who follow county court business can expect the next procedural step on March 16, when the court will hear the competing positions from Eklund and Baxter. The outcome will shape how Baker County navigates requests for modern forensic review in older cases and will speak to local expectations about the reliability of past investigations.