Welcome to the Forensics Library. Browse the library
by topic or search for documents by keyword. Some materials are viewable
only by practicing criminal defense lawyers but most are open to the public.
We invite you to submit materials to the library. We welcome briefs,
memoranda, transcripts, training materials, weblinks--anything that may help lawyers deal
more effectively with forensic evidence.
Click "submit a document" to upload materials directly from your computer.
All submissions will be reviewed by the
library steering committee before being
posted for public view.
NH Supreme Court Opinion, NH v. LangillNew Hampshire Supreme Court reverses, as abuse of discretion, trial court ruling, excluding latent print testimony because the examiner failed to adhere to her own laboratory's protocol concerning documentation (bench notes).
*Denial of Motion for Reconsideration, State v. LangillNew Hampshire trial court's denial of Motion to Reconsider exclusion of latent print evidence for failure to adhere to laboratory's protocols regarding documentation.
*Trial Court Ruling, State v. LangillNew Hampshire trial court ruling, finding latent print evidence inadmissible based on failure of analysts to adhere to their own published protocols.
*Juan Luna Print EvidencePowerpoint presentation used to challenge latent print evidence in State v. Luna, by Illinois Office of the State Appellate Defender
[
03/02/06
|
Submitter: Allan Sincox
|
more info ]
Commonwealth v. PattersonThe Supreme Court of Massachusetts rules that "simultaneous impressions" are not generally accepted in fingerprint community, but fingerprinting in general is.
State v. QuintanaUtah Court of Appeals concurring opinion holds that defendant was entitled to a jury instruction -- had he requested one -- that latent print examiners testimony is opinion, not fact, and fallible.
U.S. v. Crisp4th circuit majority upholds fingerprint and handwriting admissiblity, but dissent holds that admission of both fingerprint and handwriting evidence were abuses of discretion.
Michigan v. BallardMichigan Court of Appeals opinion stating there was "no scientific foundation" for examiner's claim that she was 99% certain of a latent print match. N.B. This decision was reversed by the Michigan Supreme Court.
Virgin Islands v. JacobsDistrict Court upholds trial judge's decision to grant defense motion to exclude fingerprint evidence because government did not respond to defense's Daubert motion or discovery requests.
[
12/28/01
|
Submitter: U.S. District Court for the District of the Virgin Islands
|
more info ]
12-27-05 Commonwealth v Patterson (Mass.)Found that ACE-V satisfied Daubert, though the trial court erred in not addressing the reliability of methods for simultaneous impressions (ident based off combining a few points in several prints rather than 8+ points in one print)
