Brief Bank
Eyewitness Identification
State v. Henderson
Amicus brief urging the New Jersey Supreme Court to change the framework governing the admission of eyewitness identification evidence.
Young v. Conway
Amicus brief in the Second Circuit challenging the admissibility of an unreliable in-court identification, following an illegal lineup.
People v. Boone
Amicus brief in the New York Court of Appeals arguing that trial courts should give a jury instruction on the cross-race effect when there is a cross-racial identification.
Garner v. People
Amicus brief in the Colorado Supreme Court arguing that first time in-court identifications are unnecessarily suggestive, and in-court identifications should only be allowed if (a) the eyewitness is well acquainted with the defendant or (b) the in-court identification is preceded by a non-suggestive out-of-court identification.
Bolin v. Baker
Amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit challenging the admissibility of an unreliable identification.
Ex parte Flores
Amicus brief in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals arguing that changes in the scientific consensus about eyewitness memory were newly available evidence requiring a new trial, in a case where hypnosis was used to produce a composite sketch and the eyewitness was unable to identify the defendant in a photo array.
People v. Sammons
Amicus brief in the Michigan Supreme Court arguing that, absent exigent circumstances, evidence from showup identifications should be inadmissible.
State v. Carpenter
Amicus brief in the Missouri Supreme Court supporting the right of the defense to call an expert witness in the field of eyewitness identification and memory.
State v. Derri
Amicus brief urging the Washington Supreme Court to incorporate scientific research about the system and estimator variables that affect eyewitness memory into its test for the admissibility of eyewitness identification evidence.
State v. Watson
Amicus brief in the New Jersey Supreme Court arguing that (a) first time in-court identifications should not be allowed, and (b) eyewitnesses should be prohibited from testifying at trial to a greater degree of confidence about an identification than they previously expressed at an initial out-of-court identification procedure.
Commonwealth v. Mercado
Amicus brief in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court arguing that advances in the study of eyewitness identifications and memory since the time of trial were newly discovered or newly available evidence, requiring a new trial.
People v. Vaughn
Amicus brief in the New York Court of Appeals arguing that expert testimony about eyewitness identifications should be admissible whenever it would aid the factfinder, regardless of whether there is evidence corroborating the identification.
People v. Garcia
Amicus brief in the New York Court of Appeals arguing that uncorroborated stranger identifications that show scientific indicia of unreliability are legally insufficient to sustain a conviction, absent additional evidence.
Coerced, False Confessions
State v. Wayne Washington
Amici brief filed in the Supreme Court of IL, in partnership with the Innocence Network, arguing that Mr. Washington (and others similarly situated) did not “contribute to their own wrongful conviction” by falsely confessing and/or entering a false guilty plea, and thus should be entitled to a certificate of innocence.
State v. Milton Lee Lemons
Amici brief filed in the Supreme Court of Michigan, in partnership with the Center for Integrity in Forensic Sciences, arguing that (1) expert biomechanical testimony is relevant, reliable, and admissible in the appropriate case involving “shaken baby syndrome,” and (2) confession evidence must not bar an otherwise meritorious post-conviction petition based on newly discovered evidence.
State v. Damon Earl Warner
Amicus brief filed in the Supreme Court of Michigan arguing that expert testimony on the science of false confessions is based on reliable science and thus should be admitted in the appropriate case.
State v. Adam Vice
Amici brief filed in the Supreme Court of Wisconsin, in partnership with the Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth and the Wisconsin Innocence Project, arguing that the Court should adopt an evidentiary rule that protects against false confessions produced by interrogations that involve misleading a suspect about polygraph results.
People v. Darrell Fair
Amici brief filed in the Supreme Court of Illinois, in partnership with the MacArthur Justice Center, the People’s Law Office, and the Center on Wrongful Convictions, arguing that confessions elicited by police violence, threats of violence, or physical deprivation (as was common in Chicago under former Police Commander Jon Burge), should be deemed involuntary per se.
People v. Al-tantawi
Amici brief filed in the Supreme Court of Michigan, in partnership with the Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth, arguing that, due to adolescents’ heightened vulnerability to false confessions, and in light of relevant U.S. Supreme Court precedent, the Court should articulate a more protective Miranda “custody” assessment for minors.
State v. Ridenour
Amicus brief filed in the Supreme Court of Alaska, urging the Court to adopt more robust procedural protections for subjects of interrogation (as compared to the federal constitutional standard), as a means of safeguarding against false confessions.
State v. Antonio Adkisson
Amici brief filed in the Supreme Court of TN, in partnership with the Tennessee IP, arguing, among other things, that a child’s confession elicited in response to police deception should be deemed involuntary and inadmissible per se.
Forensic Science
People of the State of New York vs. John Doe
Pre-trial Frye challenge to the admissibility of bite mark evidence.
Eddie Lee Howard vs. State of Mississippi
Post-conviction actual innocence case involving discredited bite mark evidence.
State of Connecticut vs. Taneisha Irving
Pre-trial Porter/Daubert challenge to the admissibility of bite mark evidence.
State of Arizona vs. Jason Derek Krause
Post-conviction actual innocence case involving comparative bullet lead analysis.
Commonwealth of Massachusetts vs. John Doe
Post-conviction actual innocence challenge to hair microscopy evidence involving an FBI analyst.
Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Geordano Rodriguez
Amicus brief educating the court about wrongful convictions stemming from forensic lab scandals.
State of Wisconsin v. Michael R. Griep
Amicus brief supporting defendant’s right to cross examine an expert witness.
Glossip v. Gross
Amicus brief in the Supreme Court involving unreliable scientific evidence used to evaluate the constitutionality of Oklahoma’s three-drug protocol used to carry out executions.
New Hampshire v. Breest
Post-conviction actual innocence case involving discredited neutron activation analysis evidence.
Other Leading Causes of Wrongful Conviction
NYP Holdings v. NYPD
Amicus brief filed in the New York Court of Appeals arguing that the 2020 repeal of a law shielding records of police misconduct from public disclosure should apply to police personnel records generated before 2020 because police misconduct is a leading cause of wrongful conviction, and the public disclosure of police misconduct can play a crucial role in uncovering and preventing wrongful convictions.