Pre-recorded lectures: 2 hrs February 7: 2 pm to 5 pm (2.5 hrs.) February 8: 9 am to 12 pm, 2 pm to 5 pm (5 hrs.) Total CLE Hours: 2 hrs prerecorded + 7.5 hrs in person = 9.5 hrs(Each three hour in-person session will include two 15 min. breaks) Forensic evidence, from DNA …
Experts
2025 Forensic Trial Litigation CLE at Duke Law
Pre-recorded lectures: 2 hrs February 7: 2 pm to 5 pm (2.5 hrs.) February 8: 9 am to 12 pm, 2 pm to 5 pm (5 hrs.) Total CLE Hours: 2 hrs prerecorded + 7.5 hrs in person = 9.5 hrs(Each three hour in-person session will include two 15 min. breaks) Forensic evidence, from DNA …
Smith v. Arizona Comes to NC
As regular readers know, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Smith v. Arizona, 602 U.S. 779 (2024), this past June. The decision undercut the reasoning used by North Carolina courts to justify the practice of permitting substitute analysts to offer an independent opinion about the forensic report of another, nontestifying analyst (as discussed here and here). Until this week, no …
The Law Must Respond When Science Changes
New Report: Wrongful Convictions in North Carolina
On October 2, 2024, the Wilson Center for Science and Justice at Duke Law marked International Wrongful Convictions Day – a day designed to raise awareness of the causes and remedies of wrongful convictions and to shed light on the tremendous harms wrongful convictions have on individuals, their families, and communities. Since 1989, 75 people have been …
Challenging the Foundational Validity of a Forensic Method Using a Statistician as an Expert
Challenging the Foundational Validity of a Forensic Method Using a Statistician as an Expert
Live webinar presented by Jordan Duhe Willetts, JD and Melinda Thielbar, PhDSept. 5, 2024, 12:30pm90 min of CLE credit anticipated In order to raise a 702 challenge to the foundational validity of a forensic method, information about the research that purports to validate the method must be presented in court. This webinar will explain how …
Smith v. Arizona and testimony of substitute analysts
On June 21, 2024, the Supreme Court issued an important decision in Smith v. Arizona. This is a good opinion; you should know about it if you don’t already. If you’d like to join an informal discussion of this case and its importance for NC defenders, Phil Dixon and I will be talking about it on the …
Smith v. Arizona and testimony of substitute analystsRead More
Substitute expert witness testimony is inadmissible in Arizona drug case, SCOTUS says
Indigent Defenders in Civil Proceedings Webinar – Expert Testimony
Live webinar offered by UNC SOG
Indigent Defenders in Civil Proceedings Webinar – Expert TestimonyRead More
Hasson Bacote trial continues Tuesday, experts testify that race played a role in his conviction
RJA hearing expert: Race is a factor in prosecutors’ decision to strike jurors
Finding Medical Experts
Since President’s Day is not a state holiday, I took advantage of the day to spend some time with some important leaders in my world, the experts that are listed in our online database of experts! Our category of medical experts was unwieldy. With over 50 experts from a variety of medical fields listed there, …
Science, Justice, and Evidence
Substitute Analyst Testimony and Smith v. Arizona
Originally posted on North Carolina Criminal Law, A UNC School of Government blog I mentioned in a recent News Roundup that the U.S. Supreme Court granted review in Smith v. Arizona. The case tees up a question that has been lingering since at least 2012: Does the Confrontation Clause permit the admission of substitute forensic analyst testimony? This …