skip navigation

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

  NCJ Number: NCJ 220975     Find in a Library
  Title: Post-Conviction DNA Testing
  Document URL: HTML 
  Author(s): Betty Fitterman
  Date Published: 04/2006
  Page Count: 3
  Annotation: This article briefly revisits a few compelling cases and reports on recent events associated with statutory standards covering postconviction testing.
  Abstract: Florida, Massachusetts, Ohio and several other States recently reviewed their statutory standards covering postconviction testing--particularly DNA testing--to test biological evidence using modern scientific technology or biological evidence not available at the time of a defendant’s original trial or conviction. Since the mid-1990s, improvements and accuracy in testing have advanced DNA evidence as the scientific standard used to prove guilt or innocence in investigations and trials. Every State has passed legislation requiring DNA collection from criminals which has solved thousands of cold cases across the country. Yet authorization for postconviction testing of untested biological evidence remains difficult for the majority of petitioners to obtain. The Justice for All Act (JFAA) enacted by Congress in 2004 includes less restrictive procedures for granting postconviction DNA testing to all Federal prisoners and is hailed by advocates as a model statute for States to follow. Many States continue to resist enacting or amending statutes to expand postconviction testing using new or substantially improved science. Since 1989, when The Innocence Project began advocating for DNA testing of critical evidence to potentially exonerate inmates, 175 defendants have been deemed not guilty of the crime for which they have spent years incarcerated. Fears that postconviction testing would open a “floodgate of frivolous claims” and overburden the criminal justice system have proven unfounded. Similar renewed interest in postconviction testing is probably attributable to The Innocence Protection Act (IPA), enacted in 2004 as part of the larger JFAA, which offers incentives for State’s willing to pass or improve statutes to conform to provisions for postconviction DNA testing specified in the Act. The law provides funding for postconviction DNA testing, and State grants to improve the quality of death penalty trials and assist families of victims. References
  Main Term(s): Evidence identification and analysis ; Evidence preservation ; Standards ; Forensics/Forensic Sciences ; Court standards ; Standards implementation ; Criminal justice standards ; Offender advocates
  Index Term(s): Convictions ; Criminal justice research ; Criminal justice system reform ; State criminal justice systems ; Criminal justice system policy ; Criminal justice projects
  Type: Issue Overview
  Country: United States of America
  Language: English
  Note: Downloaded December 20, 2007
  To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.