North Carolina Office of Indigent Defense Services
// by Sarah Olson
by Jennifer L. Mnookin, Simon A. Cole, Itiel E. Dror, Barry A. J. Fisher, Max M. Houck, Keith Inman, David H. Kaye, Jonathan J. Koehler, Glenn Langenburg, D. Michael Risinger, Norah Rudin, Jay Siegel, and David A. Stoney. Explores to what extent forensic sciences need to change to develop a well-established scientific foundation. Finds that …
The Need for a Research Culture in the Forensic SciencesRead More
// by Sarah Olson
The National Resource Counsel authored this manual to assist judges in cases involving scientific and technical evidence. There are chapters on admissibility of expert testimony, DNA evidence, statistics, toxicology, medical testimony, and many more forensic topics.
Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, Third EditionRead More
// by Sarah Olson
by Steven A. Symes, Ph.D. et al. for the U.S. Department of Justice. Available through the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (2010)
// by Sarah Olson
UNC School of Government blog post by Jeff Welty on State v. Rawls which held that show-ups are not covered by the Eyewitness Identification Reform Act.
// by Sarah Olson
Sept. 21, 2010 Order Suppressing Defendant’s Breath-Alcohol Measurements in the Absence of a Measurement for Uncertainty, District Court of King County, WA
// by Sarah Olson
by Linda Geddes, New Scientist, August 11, 2010 – gives an explanation of how subjectivity and bias affect DNA analysis. Discusses issues such as partial profiles, allelic drop-out and drop-in, mixtures, and thresholds for analysis.
// by Matt Ruby
A NC Supreme Court decision finding the trial court abused its discretion by allowing the State’s expert to visually identify drugs using an insufficiently established method. The court found the expert’s use of information in Micromedex literature to make drug identification did not meet the first prong of Rule 702 as it was never established …
// by Sarah Olson
Shea Denning of the UNC School of Government discusses the adoption of Rule 702(a1) and the admissibility of HGN and DRE evidence. For additional information, contact Shea Denning. She is available as a resource on this topic.
// by Sarah Olson
by John Louis Larsen, 8 Evidence Tech. Mag. 14-17 (July-August 2010). Provides protocols for documenting a bullet-hole entry and for event reconstruction.
// by Sarah Olson
March 23, 2010 Memorandum Decision on Motion to Suppress, Snohomish County District Court, Washington holding that to allow the numerical value of blood alcohol tests without stating a confidence level violates Rule of Evidence 403 because the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by its prejudicial value.
// by Sarah Olson
Chris Swecker and Michael Wolf were retained by the NC Attorney General’s Office to conduct an independent review of the Forensic Biology Section of the SBI Crime Laboratory. The investigation began in March 2010 and focuses on policies, procedures and practices between 1987 and 2003. The Appendix to the report contains a list of affected …
An Independent Review of the SBI Forensic LaboratoryRead More
// by Sarah Olson
// by Sarah Olson
by Jacqueline McMurtrie, , Utah Law Review, Vol 2010, No. 2. – addresses uniqueness, individualization and infallibility claims of fingerprint examination, the history of latent print individualization, recent legal challenges to latent print individualization, and the NAS report and its use in post-conviction claims based upon new developments in forensic science.
// by Sarah Olson
// by Sarah Olson