Publications

Filters

  • Focus Area

  • Publication Type

California v. Tidd

We partnered with Kelly Woodruff at the Complex Appellate Litigation Group to file a an amicus brief in the California Court of Appeals, challenging the reliability of firearm/toolmark evidence. 

Accuracy of Evidence in Criminal Cases

May 30, 2024

Judging Firearms Evidence

For over a hundred years, firearms examiners have testified that they can conclusively identify the source of a bullet or cartridge case. In recent years, however, research scientists have called into question the validity and reliability of such testimony. In this article published in the Southern California Law Review, the authors detail over a century of case law and examine how judges have engaged with the changing practice and scientific understanding of firearms comparison evidence. The more-than-a-century-long arc of judicial review of firearms evidence in the United States suggests that, over time, scientific research can displace tradition and precedent to improve the quality of justice. By Brandon Garrett, Eric Tucker and Nicholas Scurich.

Accuracy of Evidence in Criminal Cases

May 22, 2024

The Right to a Glass Box: Rethinking the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Criminal Justice

As governments and corporations use AI more pervasively, one of the most troubling trends is that developers so often design it to be a “black box.” Designers create AI models too complex for people to understand or they conceal how AI functions. Both champions and critics of AI, however, mistakenly assume that we inevitably face a trade-off: black box AI may be incomprehensible, but it performs more accurately. But that is not so. In this article published in the Cornell Law Review, authors Brandon Garrett and Cynthia Rudin question the basis for this assumption, which has so powerfully affected judges, policymakers, and academics. They describe a mature body of computer science research showing how “glass box” AI—designed to be fully interpretable by people—can be more accurate than the black box alternatives. Indeed, black box AI performs predictably worse in settings like the criminal system. Thus, Garrett and Rudin argue for national and local regulation to safeguard, in all criminal cases, the right to glass box AI. By Brandon Garrett and Cynthia Rudin.

Accuracy of Evidence in Criminal Cases

April 24, 2024

Bail Reform in Harris County: What Have We Learned?

On November 21, 2019, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Lee Rosenthal approved the Consent Decree in ODonnell v. Harris County. The new rules laid out in this consent decree require prompt release on unsecured bonds for the vast majority of people arrested for misdemeanor offenses. The Monitor and Deputy Monitor, Brandon Garrett and Sandra Guerra Thompson, are responsible for monitoring the progress in Harris County. This fact sheet shares key findings over the first four years after reform, including changes in release rates, racial disparities, and effects on public safety.

Equity in Criminal Outcomes

New Insights on Expert Opinion About Eyewitness Memory Research

In this article published in Perspectives on Psychological Science, the authors surveyed 76 experimental psychologists for their opinions on eyewitness memory phenomena. They compared these current expert opinions to expert opinions from the past several decades. They found that experts today share many of the same opinions as experts in the past and have more nuanced thoughts about two issues. Experts in the past endorsed the idea that confidence is weakly related to accuracy, but experts today acknowledge the potential diagnostic value of initial confidence collected from a properly administered lineup. In addition, experts in the past may have favored sequential over simultaneous lineup presentation, but experts today are divided on this issue. This new survey provides important information and context to courts and to other stakeholders of eyewitness research. By Travis M. Seale-Carlisle, Adele Quigley-McBride, Jennifer E. F. Teitcher, William E. Crozier, Chad S. Dodson, and Brandon L. Garrett.

Accuracy of Evidence in Criminal Cases

April 18, 2024

Monitoring Pretrial Reform In Harris County: Seventh Report Of The Court-Appointed Monitor

Wilson Center Faculty Director Brandon Garrett serves as independent monitor for the landmark federal bail reform settlement in Harris County, TX. This seventh report by the monitor team describes the first four years of work evaluating the implementation of the misdemeanor bail reforms in Harris County, Texas. (2024)

Equity in Criminal Outcomes

March 5, 2024

Evaluation of Durham’s ShotSpotter Installation: Results of a 12-month Pilot Project

The ShotSpotter pilot was deployed from December 15, 2022 – December 14, 2023 in a three-square-mile area of Durham that have historically had comparatively high rates of gun violence. This examines the performance of ShotSpotter in the pilot area and is authored by Philip Cook, Professor Emeritus of Public Policy and Economics, Duke University, and Adam Soliman, Assistant Professor of Economics, Clemson University. It delves into ShotSpotter’s effects on notifications and police deployment; productivity of investigations; and the costs to the city’s budget and police resources. 

Accuracy of Evidence in Criminal Cases, Equity in Criminal Outcomes

February 22, 2024

ShotSpotter in Durham, NC: A Community Sentiment Evaluation

In July 2023, the Wilson Center conducted nine focus groups and two individual interviews, with a total of 30 participants who live in the ShotSpotter pilot area in Durham, North Carolina. Participants were asked to discuss their perceptions of safety, gun violence, policing in their neighborhoods, ShotSpotter technology, and changes in policing or violence since the ShotSpotter pilot began. This report summarizes and analyzes those findings and identifies key policy considerations for the City as they weigh whether to continue ShotSpotter.

Accuracy of Evidence in Criminal Cases, Equity in Criminal Outcomes

January 24, 2024

Police Officers’ (In)ability to Detect Concealed Objects

This white paper describes recent research by Dawn Sweet, Adele Quigley McBride, and Chris Meissner that found that trained police officers and lay persons were equally bad at determining whether people were concealing dangerous or illegal objects. Indeed, there is no evidence that anyone can determine whether someone is concealing simply by observing people from a distance as there are no objective, reliable, observable predictors that indicate a person is concealing.  Thus this white paper argues that it is misguided to train officers to look for “articulable behaviors” as clues that someone is hiding contraband and that courts should reconsider their approach to assessing the evidence presented by police to justify interactions with civilians allowed under Terry.

By Adele Quigley-McBride

Accuracy of Evidence in Criminal Cases

December 8, 2023

When the Dollars Don’t Add Up to Sense

This policy brief discusses how and why North Carolina must rethink its approach to criminal fines and fees. By Lindsay Bass-Patel and Angie Weis Gammell.

Equity in Criminal Outcomes

November 9, 2023