This brief is signed by scholars representing a variety of disciplines, including law, ethics, forensic science, medicine, and statistics. The scholars have an interest in the quality and improvement of forensic science. Amici believe that forensic analyses should be disclosed, not matter whether the results are inculpatory, exculpatory, or non-probative, as a matter of professional ethics, sound science, and law. Amici are also interested in improving the administration of justice in general and the quality of evidence presented at criminal trials in particular. Amici are concerned that failure to disclose forensic conclusions can contribute to wrongful convictions.
Brief of Amici Curiae, Long v. Hooks, No. 18-6980 (4th Cir.)
Published: 2018
Primary Author: Brandon Garrett
Type: Publication
Research Area: Implementation and Practice
Related Resources
Judges and forensic science education: A national survey
In criminal cases, forensic science reports and expert testimony play an increasingly important role in adjudication. More states now follow a federal reliability standard, which calls upon judges to assess…
Using mixture models to examine group difference among jurors: an illustration involving the perceived strength of forensic science evidence
The way in which jurors perceive reports of forensic evidence is of critical importance, especially in cases of forensic identification evidence that require examiners to compare items and assess whether…
Battling to a draw: Defense expert rebuttal can neutralize prosecution fingerprint evidence
The present study examined whether a defense rebuttal expert can effectively educate jurors on the risk that the prosecution’s fingerprint expert made an error. Using a sample of 1716 jury-eligible…
CSAFE 2021 Field Update
The 2021 Field Update was held June 14, 2021, and served as the closing to the first year of CSAFE 2.0. CSAFE brought together researchers, forensic science partners and interested…