Loading...
Looking Backwards at Old Cases: When Science Moves Forward
Epstein, Jules
Epstein, Jules
Citations
Altmetric:
Genre
Journal article
Date
2016
Advisor
Committee member
Group
Department
Permanent link to this record
Collections
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
DOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.34944/dspace/6717
Abstract
Forensic evidence—be it in the form of science-derived analyses such as DNA profiling or drug identification, or in more subjective analyses such as pattern or impression [latent print, handwriting, firearms] examinations—is prevalent and often critical in criminal prosecutions. Yet, while the criminal court processes prize finality of verdicts, science evolves and often proves that earlier analyses were inadequate or plainly wrong. This article examines the tension between those two concerns by focusing on the 2015 decision of the United States Supreme Court in Maryland v. Kulbicki, addresses the inadequacies of the Court’s analysis, and suggests some factors for judges confronted with changing science to weigh when reviewing convictions where the forensic evidence was core to the prosecution’s proof.
Description
Citation
Jules Epstein, Looking Backwards at Old Cases: When Science Moves Forward, 106 J. CRIM. L. & CRIMINOLOGY (2016).
Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol106/iss1/3
Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol106/iss1/3
Citation to related work
Northwestern University
Has part
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol. 106, Iss. 1
ADA compliance
For Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodation, including help with reading this content, please contact scholarshare@temple.edu