Law Commons^™

Analyzing Wrongful Convictions Beyond The Traditional Canonical List Of Errors, For Enduring Structural And Sociological Attributes, (Juveniles, Racism, Adversary System, Policing Policies), Leona D. Jochnowitz, Tonya Kendall

Touro Law Review

Researchers identify possible structural causes for wrongful convictions: racism, justice system culture, adversary system, plea bargaining, media, juvenile and mentally impaired accused, and wars on drugs and crime. They indicate that unless the root causes of conviction error are identified, the routine explanations of error (e.g., eyewitness identifications; false confessions) will continue to re-occur. Identifying structural problems may help to prevent future wrongful convictions. The research involves the coding of archival data from the Innocence Project for seventeen cases, including the one for the Central Park Five exonerees. The data were coded by Hartwick College and Northern Vermont University students …

Faulty Forensics: Bolstering Judicial Gatekeeping In Georgia Courts, Miranda S. Bidinger

Georgia Law Review

Forensic evidence is widely used in criminal cases
across the country and is accorded great weight by
juries. But critics have begun to question its reliability.
Its use has contributed to numerous wrongful
convictions, and though some individuals have been
exonerated, many remain incarcerated for crimes they
did not commit.
This Note explores a variety of forensic science
disciplines and their associated problems, the recent
push for forensic reform, and the current standards
governing the admissibility of forensic evidence at the
federal level and in Georgia courts, highlighting the
lenient standard embodied in the Georgia Code and
elaborated upon in …

Scientific Excellence In The Forensic Science Community, Alice R. Isenberg, Cary T. Oien

Fordham Law Review Online

This Article was prepared as a companion to the Fordham Law Review Reed Symposium on Forensic Expert Testimony, Daubert, and Rule 702, held on October 27, 2017, at Boston College School of Law. The Symposium took place under the sponsorship of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules. For an overview of the Symposium, see Daniel J. Capra, Foreword: Symposium on Forensic Testimony, Daubert, and Rule 702, 86 Fordham L. Rev. 1459 (2018).

Scientific Validity And Error Rates: A Short Response To The Pcast Report, Ted Robert Hunt

Fordham Law Review Online

This Article was prepared as a companion to the Fordham Law Review Reed Symposium on Forensic Expert Testimony, Daubert, and Rule 702, held on October 27, 2017, at Boston College School of Law. The Symposium took place under the sponsorship of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules. For an overview of the Symposium, see Daniel J. Capra, Foreword: Symposium on Forensic Testimony, Daubert, and Rule 702, 86 Fordham L. Rev. 1459 (2018).

The Reliability Of The Adversarial System To Assess The Scientific Validity Of Forensic Evidence, Andrew D. Goldsmith

Fordham Law Review Online

This Article was prepared as a companion to the Fordham Law Review Reed Symposium on Forensic Expert Testimony, Daubert, and Rule 702, held on October 27, 2017, at Boston College School of Law. The Symposium took place under the sponsorship of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules. For an overview of the Symposium, see Daniel J. Capra, Foreword: Symposium on Forensic Testimony, Daubert, and Rule 702, 86 Fordham L. Rev. 1459 (2018).

Cabining Judicial Discretion Over Forensic Evidence With A New Special Relevance Rule, Emma F.E. Shoucair

Michigan Law Review

Modern forensic evidence suffers from a number of flaws, including insufficient scientific grounding, exaggerated testimony, lack of uniform best practices, and an inefficacious standard for admission that regularly allows judges to admit scientifically unsound evidence. This Note discusses these problems, lays out the current landscape of forensic science reform, and suggests the addition of a new special relevance rule to the Federal Rules of Evidence (and similar rules in state evidence codes). This proposed rule would cabin judicial discretion to admit non-DNA forensic evidence by barring prosecutorial introduction of such evidence in criminal trials absent a competing defense expert or …

Debunked, Discredited, But Still Defended: Why Prosecutors Resist Challenges To Bad Science And Some Suggestions For Crafting Remedies For Wrongful Conviction Based On Changed Science, Aviva A. Orenstein

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Flawed science has significantly contributed to wrongful convictions. Courts struggle with how to address such convictions when the mistaken science (such as bogus expert claims about the differences between accidental fires and intentionally set ones) significantly affected the guilty verdict but there is no DNA evidence to directly exonerate the accused. My short piece explores why prosecutors often defend bad science. Mistakes in science tend to serve the prosecution, but there are other more subtle factors that explain prosecutors’ reluctance to address flawed forensic testimony. Such reluctance may arise from fondness for the status quo and a resistance to subverting …

Scientific Evidence And Forensic Science Since Daubert: Maine Decides To Sit Out On The Dance, Thomas L. Bohan

Maine Law Review

In 1993, the Supreme Court of the United States stated that with the federal adoption of statutory rules of evidence in 1975, the common law rule for determining admissibility of scientific testimony was superseded, and that thenceforth admissibility of scientific testimony was to be determined solely by Federal Rule of Evidence 702 (Rule 702). The Frye standard had been adopted in one form or another by most of the federal circuits and by many of the state courts during the 70 years preceding Daubert. Referred to as the “general acceptance” standard, the Frye standard--although adopted in a variety of forms--had …

Wrongful Convictions And Their Causes: An Annotated Bibliography, Clanitra Stewart Nejdl

Northern Illinois University Law Review

This Annotated Bibliography directs attorneys to relevant, select legal periodical articles written from 2010 to 2016 on wrongful convictions and their causes. The authors focus on five major causes that lead to wrongful convictions, as evidenced by the literature. Part I of the Annotated Bibliography focuses on resources that discuss false confessions as a cause of wrongful convictions. Part II discusses resources that address the role of police and prosecutorial practices, including misconduct, in wrongful convictions. Part III provides articles on eyewitness and jailhouse informant issues related to wrongful convictions. Part IV contains articles that deal with how forensic evidence …

Virginia’S Interpretation Of Ake V. Oklahoma: A Hollow Right, Andrew Monaghan Higgins

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Bias, Subjectivity, And Wrongful Conviction, Katherine Judson

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

A talk about bias, subjectivity and wrongful convictions.

Evidence Of Child Abuse: Inferring The Causes Of Effects, Stephen E. Fienberg

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

A statistician's take on evidence of child abuse.

Changing The Culture Of Disclosure And Forensics, Valena Beety

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

This Essay responds to Professor Brandon Garrett’s Constitutional Regulation of Forensic Evidence, and, in particular, his identification of the dire need to change the culture of disclosing forensic evidence. My work on forensics is—similarly to Garrett’s—rooted in both scholarship and litigation of wrongful convictions. From this perspective, I question whether prosecutors fully disclose forensics findings and whether defense attorneys understand these findings and their impact on a client’s case. To clarify forensic findings for the entire courtroom, this Essay suggests increased pre-trial discovery and disclosure of forensic evidence and forensic experts. Forensic analysts largely work in police-governed labs; therefore, …

Wrongful Convictions And Their Causes: An Annotated Bibliography, Clanitra Stewart Nejdl

College of Law Faculty Publications

This Annotated Bibliography directs attorneys to relevant, select legal periodical articles written from 2010 to 2016 on wrongful convictions and their causes. The authors focus on five major causes that lead to wrongful convictions, as evidenced by the literature. Part I of the Annotated Bibliography focuses on resources that discuss false confessions as a cause of wrongful convictions. Part II discusses resources that address the role of police and prosecutorial practices, including misconduct, in wrongful convictions. Part III provides articles on eyewitness and jailhouse informant issues related to wrongful convictions. Part IV contains articles that deal with how forensic evidence …

The Crime Lab In The Age Of The Genetic Panopticon, Brandon L. Garrett

Michigan Law Review

Review of Unfair: The New Science of Criminal Injustice by Adam Benforado, Inside the Cell: The Dark Side of Forensic DNA by Erin E. Murphy, and Cops in Lab Coats: Curbing Wrongful Convictions Through Independent Forensic Laboratories by Sandra Guerra Thompson.

The New Pcast Report To The President Of The United States On Forensic Science, Robert M. Sanger

Robert M. Sanger

Constitutional Regulation Of Forensic Evidence, Brandon L. Garrett

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

2015 Symposium: Wrongful Convictions: Science, Experience & The Law Keynote Panel Discussion, Mary Kelly Tate

Law Faculty Publications

The following is a minimally-edited transcript of the panel speakers from the 2015 Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest Symposium, Wrongful Convictions: Science, Experience and the Law held on October 29, 2015. Biographies of the speakers are included in the Introductory Remarks. None of the opinions of these persons are necessarily the opinion of their respective agencies or employers. They are not to be used nor will they be able to be used for any legally binding purpose regarding the speaker or any agency.

Moderator: Professor Mary Kelly Tate, Director, Richmond Institute for Actual Innocence

Panelists: Shawn Armbrust …

Face-To-Face With Facial Recognition Evidence: Admissibility Under The Post-Crawford Confrontation Clause, Joseph Clarke Celentino

Michigan Law Review

In Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court announced a major change in Confrontation Clause doctrine, abandoning a decades-old framework that focused on the common law principles of hearsay analysis: necessity and reliability. The new doctrine, grounded in an originalist interpretation of the Sixth Amendment, requires courts to determine whether a particular statement is testimonial. But the Court has struggled to present a coherent definition of the term testimonial. In its subsequent decisions, the Court illustrated that its new Confrontation Clause doctrine could be used to bar forensic evidence, including laboratory test results, if the government failed to produce the …

The Right To Silence As Protecting Mental Control, Dov Fox

Akron Law Review

This Article examines the idea that individuals have a moral and constitutional right of control over the use of their thoughts vis-à-vis the state. As a point of departure, I consider the prospect of a forensic neuroimaging device that was capable of eliciting recall and recognition from a criminal suspect without the suspect’s having even to answer an interrogator’s question. Reflection on government access to this sort of interrogation technique suggests that the state should be prohibited from either extracting a person’s thoughts without her consent or making use of her compelled thoughts to lay criminal blame upon her. Though …

Forensic Evidence And The Court Of Appeal For England And Wales, Lissa Griffin

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The Criminal Division of the Court of Appeal has extensively analyzed the role of forensic evidence. In doing so, the court has grappled with the admissibility and reliability of a broad range of forensic evidence, from DNA and computer forensics to medical and psychological proof, to more outlying subjects like facial mapping, fiber analysis, or voice identification. The court has analyzed these subjects from two perspectives: the admissibility of such evidence in the lower courts and the admissibility of such evidence as fresh evidence on appeal. In both contexts, the court has taken a practical approach to admitting forensic proof …

“What Happened To Me Can Happen To Anybody”—Women Exonerees Speak Out, Zieva Dauber Konvisser

Texas A&M Law Review

Only a few studies have investigated the psychological consequences of wrongful conviction; several others have examined the psychological consequences of incarceration and its impact on reentry and reintegration, primarily for men. For women who have been wrongfully convicted and subsequently released from prison into the free world, there are further indignities and unique issues: having to deal with the deep personal loss of murdered loved ones along with criminal charges; the absence of DNA evidence, making convictions harder to fight; stigmatization by prosecutors and the media; and unique emotional and medical needs.

This Article presents findings from in-depth interviews with …

Putting The Microscope On Crime Labs: The Effects Of Evidence Complexity And Laboratory Type On Jurors' Perceptions Of Forensic Evidence, Miliaikeala S.J. Heen

UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones

An experiment was conducted to test the effects of evidence complexity and laboratory type on jurors' perceptions of forensic evidence. The study specifically focused on three types of labs: public labs, private labs, and "corporate labs." Public labs are managed by a federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, where evidence is usually analyzed internally at an agency. Private labs are those that have been formed as private businesses to provide services to federal, state, and local crime labs with overflow work. Corporate labs are managed by major retail corporations, and primarily service the needs of their store businesses, but …

The New Rules For Admissibility Of Expert Testimony: Part Ii, Robert Sanger

Robert M. Sanger

As described in the last Criminal Justice column for the Santa Barbara Lawyer magazine, the California Supreme Court’s opinion in Sargon Enterprises v. University of Southern California, 55 Cal. 4th 747, 149 Cal. Rptr. 3d 614 (2012) made it clear that California is now, (and perhaps unsuspectingly has been for some time), a Daubert jurisdiction. This requires the trial court be the “gatekeeper” and make a determination as to the admissibility of scientific or expert testimony and to determine the limits of any testimony, if it is introduced. The Court held that there are essentially three criteria: The first criterion …

The New Rules For Admissibility Of Expert Testimony: Part I, Robert Sanger

Robert M. Sanger

In a previous series of articles for this magazine, I took the position that California really was a Daubert jurisdiction in the sense that Kelly and Frye and thenexisting case law required that the court be the “gatekeeper” and make a determination as to: 1) whether a science (or area of expertise) was a science (or area of expertise); 2) whether the witness was a scientist (or expert); 3) whether the data was reliable; and then, and only then, 4) what a true scientist (or expert) could say based on the science and based on the reliable data. In the …

Wrongful Conviction Claims Under Section 1983, Martin A. Schwartz, Robert W. Pratt Honorable

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Wrongful Conviction Claims Under Section 1983, Martin A. Schwartz, Robert W. Pratt

Martin A. Schwartz

No abstract provided.

Wrongful Conviction Claims Under Section 1983, Martin A. Schwartz, Robert W. Pratt

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Grabbing The Bullcoming By The Horns: How The Supreme Court Could Have Used Bullcoming V. New Mexico To Clarify Confrontation Clause Requirements For Csi-Type Reports, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In the pilot episode of the hit television show CSI, Grissom says to Warrick: "Concentrate on what cannot lie. The evidence." Although Grissom is a beloved figure in U.S. popular culture, the U.S. is currently unwilling to accept that evidence never lies. In stark contrast to Grissom's statement, the common law has a long history of allowing criminal defendants to cross-examine and question witnesses providing evidence against them. The right to confront an accusatory witness is reflected in the historical legal documents of Great Britain, in Shakespearean writing, and even in the Bible. In the United States, the right to …

The Implications Of A Jeopardy! Computer Named Watson: Beating Corporate Boards Of Directors At Fiduciary Duties?, Roger M. Groves

Roger M. Groves

Millions of documents, including five million messages, termed electronically stored information (“ESI”) from the Enron litigation have provided an opportunity for software developers to create software that analyzes ESI for behaviors of computer users in more provocative and innovative ways than previously encountered. The law is struggling to clarify e-discovery rules, but the ambiguities provide an opportunity for counsel to manipulate or take advantage of forensic investigations. In this article, the author examines the potential exploitation of e-discovery forensic tools by shareholders of a corporation that suspect a breach of fiduciary duties by members of the board of directors.