Materials - The Network of Trial Law Firms

More documents

Recommendations

Info

wrongful convictions. In some cases, labs and theirpersonnel are not impartial, because they are tooclosely tied to police and prosecutors. Other times,a criminologist who lacks necessary knowledge mayexaggerate findings and does not have to worry aboutbeing caught because the lawyer, judge, and jury haveno background in the relevant science. In many cases,critical evidence is destroyed making re-testing touncover the misconduct is impossible.The FactsMany people deal with forensic evidence at differentstages in the criminal process. Identification, collection,testing, storage, handling, and reporting of evidencecan be deliberately or accidentally mishandled at anystage:At the crime scene, evidence can be planted,destroyed, or mishandled.At the forensic lab, evidence can becontaminated, poorly tested, consumed ormislabeled.In the report, results can be misrepresentedDNA exonerations have revealed a number ofcases where results were reported on evidencewhen no test was actually done!Examples of Forensic Misconduct that have lead towrongful convictions:Fred Zain, the former director of the West Virginia statecrime lab, testified for the prosecution in 12 statesover his career (many in West Virginia and Texas) andhas left a trail of fabricated results, false testimony onresults, and has willfully omitted evidence from hisreports.Pamela Fish, a Chicago lab technician, has testified forthe prosecution about false matches and suspiciousresults in at least eight cases that secured convictions,but were later proven innocent by DNA testing.The RemediesA number of reforms could limit the number of caseswhere forensic misconduct occurs. For example, theInnocence Project suggests states impose standardson the preservation and handling of evidence. Inaddition, when exonerations suggest misconduct ofan analyst or that a facility lacked proper proceduresor oversight, independent audits of their work in othercases should take place to uncover the possibility ofother wrongful convictions.FALSE CONFESSIONSThe CausesIn more than 25% of exonerated cases the defendantsmade incriminating statements or gave outrightconfessions to crimes that DNA evidence provesthey did not commit. There are many reasons whydefendants give false confessions:DuressCoercionIntoxicationDiminished capacityMental impairmentIgnorance of the lawFear of violenceInfliction of harm by interrogatorThreat of harsh sentenceMisunderstanding of situationMental State of the ConfessorJuvenile confessions are often unreliable, becausechildren can be easily manipulated or do not fullyunderstand the situation. Both juveniles and adultsthink that they can go home if they just confess.People with disabilities are likely to give a falseconfession, because they are tempted to accommodateand respect authority. In addition, most interrogatorslack the training to question people who are mentallydisabled, which can lead to false confessions.Lengthy interrogations or exhaustion can also causepeople to falsely confess. Some also believe that theycan confess now and go home and worry about provingtheir actual innocence later.The RemedyAll states should follow Minnesota’s lead in mandatingall interrogations to be electronically recorded with audioand video. These recordings help both prosecutorsand defense lawyers accurately portray the confessionof the accused while also identifying false confessions.INFORMANT TESTIMONYThe FactsIn over 15% of wrongful conviction cases reversedusing newly discovered DNA evidence, a snitch orinformant testified against the defendant. It shouldnot come as a surprise that snitches lie or falsifyevidence on the stand. For a desperate inmate,incentives like a shortened sentence can become veryenticing. Similarly, snitches facing possible jail time are
often compelled to testify on behalf of the prosecutionas a way to avoid incarceration themselves. This kindof informant testimony can literally make or break acase when no hard evidence is involved.People have been wrongfully convicted in cases wherethe snitch:Was paid to testifyTestified in exchange for being released fromprisonTestified that they overheard a confession orwitnessed the crimeThe RemediesReform is necessary to reduce the weight juriesattach to the unreliable testimony of snitches.Possible remedies include assessing the credibilityof the informant and revealing their prior historyto the jury, electronically recording all meetingswith the informant, and ensuring the snitch doesnot have access to sensitive case information.GOVERNMENT MISCONDUCTOfficial misconduct includes both police andprosecutorial misconduct. Coercive conduct andpoor investigation by police can lead to wrongfulconvictions. Law enforcement officials have also usedforced confessions, violence toward suspects, andmanufactured evidence, which have led to wrongfulaccusations and convictions. Prosecutor misconductincludes suppression of exculpatory evidence,destruction of evidence, use of unreliable anduntruthful witnesses and snitches, and the fabricationof evidence.The FactsPolice Misconduct in the first 74 exonerated cases:34% Suppression of Exculpatory Evidence33% Allegation of Undue Suggestiveness inPre-Trial ID Procedures11% Evidence Fabrication9% Allegation of Coerced Witness8% Coerced Confession/Admission Alleged5% Other MisconductProsecutorial Misconduct in the first 74 exoneratedcases:37% Suppression of Exculpatory Evidence25% Knowing Use of False Testimony11% Coerced Witness9% Improper Closing Arguments9% False Statements to Jury5% Evidence Fabrications4% Other MisconductThe RemediesPolice and prosecutors need to be trained to avoid,and held accountability for, using improper techniques.One step would be to create disciplinary committeesthat would focus on the misconduct of police officersand prosecutors. In addition, the higher involvementof federal agencies could also work to limit officialmisconductBAD LAWYERINGThe CausesThere are a number of reasons why a defendant’sdefense may not be sufficient:Resources in judicial system are stackedagainst poor defendants.Defense lawyers can be ineffective,incompetent, or overburdened with too manycases.Overworked lawyers may fail to properlyinvestigate, call key witnesses, or adequatelyprepare for trial.Public defenders and court-appointed attorneysare not able to access adequate resourcesbecause of decreased funding.A review of exonerated cases has shown a trail ofunacceptable defense lawyering practices at the trialand appeal levels. In some of the worst cases, defenseattorneys have:Slept in the courtroom during trialBeen disbarred shortly after finishing a deathpenalty caseFailed to investigate alibisFailed to call or consult experts on forensicevidenceFailed to show up for hearingsThe RemediesPublic defense offices must be adequately funded andstaffed so that attorneys are not required to take onmore cases than suggested by ABA guidelines. In orderto provide the best possible defense for the accused,state and local funds need to remain substantial.Securing adequate pay for public defenders canimprove competency and quality of defense attorneysby insuring that the best attorneys are hired and willremain in those positions as they gain more experience.All defense attorneys must have the training, ability,and desire to provide sincere advocacy for their clients.
Page 1: The Work Of The Innocence ProjectDa
Page 16 and 17: STATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF WRIGHTD
Page 19 and 20: In petitioner’s case, Dale Todd
Page 21 and 22: “bore the characteristics of a gu
Page 23 and 24: In most cases, a court will have to
Page 25 and 26: defendants who provide substantial
Page 27 and 28: CONCLUSIONThe Affidavit of Dale Tod
Page 29 and 30: lood on a bat seized from Todd’s
Page 31 and 32: ARGUMENT1. The Supreme Court’s Re
Page 33 and 34: A: And I just - nobody would believ
Page 35 and 36: walking down the road, and that Ols
Page 37 and 38: and that he was pressured into test
Page 39 and 40: on direct appeal, and required a he
Page 41 and 42: additional fact-finding. See Dukes,
Page 43 and 44: Wakefield concluded that Todd was
Page 45 and 46: 3. If Any Claim Of Ineffective Assi
Page 47 and 48: present evidence to expose an adver
Page 49 and 50: appeal. Finally, appellate counsel
Page 51 and 52: andInnocence Project of Minnesota15
Page 53 and 54:
III.August 11, 1979:November 4, 200
Page 55 and 56:
IV.Olson requests relief as follows
Page 57 and 58:
Olson’s appellate attorney did no
Page 59:
About David SchultzPartner | Maslon
show all

Materials - The Network of Trial Law Firms

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?