In this Essay, I describe how despite decades of missed opportunities to adequately regulate forensics, in recent rulings the Supreme Court and lower courts increasingly focus on sound litigation of forensics. In an era of plea bargaining, the accuracy of forensic analysis depends far less on cross-examination at trial, and far more on sound lab techniques, full disclosure of strengths and limitations of forensic evidence to prosecutors and the defense, and careful litigation. The Sixth Amendment and the Due Process Clauses are emerging as promising constitutional sources for improved regulation of forensics, including through ineffective assistance of counsel and Brady v. Maryland rulings focusing on investigations and plea bargains, as well as the general due process guarantee of a fair trial.
Constitutional Regulation of Forensic Evidence

Journal: Washington and Lee Law Review
Published: 2018
Primary Author: Brandon Garrett
Type: Publication
Research Area: Implementation and Practice
Related Resources
An Overview and Comparison of Software Tools for Quantifying Value of Handwriting Evidence
This presentation is from the 77th Annual Conference of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS), Baltimore, Maryland, February 17-22, 2025. Posted with permission of CSAFE.
How signature complexity affects expert and lay ability to distinguish genuine, disguised and simulated signatures
This study examined how variations in signature complexity affected the ability of forensic document examiners (FDEs) and laypeople to determine whether signatures are authentic or simulated (forged), as well as…
Score-based Likelihood Ratios Using Stylometric Text Embeddings
We consider the problem setting in which we have two sets of texts in digital form and would like to quantify our beliefs that the two sets of texts were…

