Resources

By Lindsay Bass Patel, this report analyzes the impact of the 2019 Harris County, Texas Consent Decree that implemented new bail policies for misdemeanor cases.

By Nicholas Scurich, David Faigman, and Brandon L. Garrett.

Judicial limitations on forensic firearm identification testimony aim to prevent overstated conclusions declaring a definitive match (or “identification”) between bullets or cartridge cases and a specific firearm. The Maryland Supreme Court has ruled that examiners may state only that markings are “consistent with” those from a particular firearm. Another judicial ruling held that examiners may state only that the defendant’s firearm “cannot be excluded” as the source of the fired bullets or cartridge cases. These studies examined whether these limitations reduce juror conviction rates. The authors found “Consistent with” did not significantly reduce guilty verdicts compared with definitive identification testimony, suggesting that it may not effectively convey limitations to jurors. Courts may need more robust interventions to limit the persuasive power of forensic firearm identification testimony.

Involuntary civil commitment statutes codify the process of involuntary admission to a health care facility. Many statutes assign law enforcement to preside over custody and transportation during the commitment process, which can be traumatizing to people taken into custody. States and localities are seeking to develop alternative crisis response approaches that reduce law enforcement involvement. This study aimed to document variations in state laws pertaining to custody and transportation during involuntary civil commitment.

By Marvin S. Swartz, M.D., Megan Moore, J.D., Katie Lazar, B.A. in Psychiatric Services

A Toolkit for Organizers to Reform Forensic Evidence

This fact sheet describes how compensation for exonerees has evolved in the past several decades, including through successful litigation efforts and through the enactment of compensation legislation in thirty-nine states, Washington D.C., and by the federal government. It includes a table describing each of the state and federal statutes.

By Brandon L. Garrett, Richard E. Gutierrez, and Nicholas Scurich.

Firearms examiners, who seek to link fired ammunition to a particular gun, have testified in criminal trials for over a century. Research suggests that such evidence is highly persuasive to jurors. However, no studies have examined the effect of divergent conclusions offered by defense firearms examiners, nor have any explored the impact of testimony by research scientists—sometimes called “methods experts”—regarding the scientific foundation and limitations of the firearm examination discipline. The effect these types of testimony might have on jurors is, therefore, unknown. This article in Jurimetrics reports the results of a novel empirical study testing the effects of such defense experts. While most participants found the unrebutted testimony of a firearms examiner sufficient to convict the defendant, guilty verdicts were significantly reduced when the defense called an expert. Further, defense experts reduced the perceived likelihood that the defendant discharged the firearm, the strength of the prosecution’s case, the case-specific reliability of the firearm examination, and the general reliability of the firearm examination. However, critical differences existed between our various conditions involving defense expert testimony.

Brandon Garrett joined The Innocence Project in this amicus brief that argued that current scientific research demonstrates the unreliability of unduly suggestive eyewitness identification evidence admitted at Mr. Johnson’s trial.

By Michele M. Easter, Nicole L. Schramm-Sapyta, Marvin S. Swartz, Maria A. Tackett, and Lawrence H. Greenblatt.

More than 7 million people are released each year from U.S. jails or prisons, many with chronic diseases that would benefit from primary care in their returning communities. This study analyzed primary care need and utilization by all individuals ever detained in one county detention facility over a 7-year period. The authors found that having more jail bookings was associated with fewer primary care visits, though not one-time access. This finding was driven by subgroups with chronic disease, who most need regular primary care. Even after accounting for other variables, being Black was also linked to fewer primary care visits. Therefore, the authors argue that it is not enough to focus on initial access to healthcare, but also to promote continued engagement with primary care. For example, medicaid expansion should be coupled with specialized, tailored support to promote engagement in primary care.

For too many people experiencing acute mental illness, cries for help bring police and handcuffs rather than compassionate medical intervention. But this doesn’t have to be the case. This report examines the laws across the U.S. related to law enforcement custody and transportation under involuntary civil commitment, when alternative transport is permitted, and opportunities to reduce the role of law enforcement in these situations when possible.

This amicus brief challenged unreliable firearm tool mark comparison expert testimony. We joined with numerous amici in arguing that traditional forensic firearms and toolmark comparisons raise reliability concerns regarding methods and applications of the methods, showing that the scientific community has carefully detailed the lack of reliability of firearms and toolmark comparisons.