Amicus Brief Bank

The Amicus Brief Bank is an online archive of all Amicus Briefs filed by the Innocence Network in cases around the country.

What is an Amicus Brief?

An amicus brief is a written legal argument filed by someone not directly involved in a case on appeal to help educate the court about particular issues. The Network decides when to file amicus briefs based upon many factors including which jurisdiction the case is in, what the particular issues being advocated are, and what kind of an impact the brief might have.

Submit an Amicus Brief Request

See our amicus brief request page to submit a request to the Innocence Network’s Amicus Committee

View the Amicus Brief Bank

filter by

sort by

all amicus briefs

Amicus brief

Unreliable Forensic Science

Prante, John, People of the State of Illinois v. (2022)

Position: The Court should grant Amici’s motion for leave and accept the proposed brief, under the third reason listed above, because of Amici’s unique expertise on issues related to the use of flawed or unreliable scientific and forensic evidence—including bite-mark evidence, which is at issue in this case—and the ways in which such faulty evidence contributes to wrongful convictions.

Decision: Pending

Counsel:

Fox Swibel Levin & Carroll LLP

Courts:

Supreme Court of Illinois

Case #: 127241

View PDF

Amicus brief

Actual Innocence

New Evidence of Innocence

Shaken Baby Syndrome

State/Federal Habeas Corpus Rules & Procedures

Gutierrez, Ruben, Ex Parte (2022)

Position: The Court should exercise its equitable and statutory authority to sever the unconstitutional provision of Chapter 64 and enforce the remainder of Chapter 64 so as to order the requested DNA testing.

Decision: On 5/25/22, the Court denied the Motion for Chapter 64 DNA Testing

Counsel:

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Courts:

107th District Court of Cameron County, Texas

Case #: 98-CR-1391-A

View PDF

Amicus brief

Actual Innocence

New Evidence of Innocence

Shaken Baby Syndrome

State/Federal Habeas Corpus Rules & Procedures

Smith, Danyel v. State of Georgia (2022)

Position: Based on the widely recognized, fundamental shift in the medical underpinnings of an SBS diagnosis, the trial court erred when it failed to grant Mr. Smith a hearing on his extraordinary motion for new trial.

Decision: Decided May 13, 2022; the Supreme Court of Georgia granted the application for discretionary appeal.

Counsel:

King & Spalding, LLP

Courts:

Supreme Court of Georgia

Case #: S22D0915

View PDF

Amicus brief

Actual Innocence

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

New Evidence of Innocence

Shields, Derrick v. Jerry Bradshaw (2022)

Position: The Eighth Circuit should act to correct the overly narrow, incorrect interpretations of Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 (1995), and Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. 1 (2012) that have taken hold within that circuit—in contradiction to the standards that have prevailed in cases from the US Supreme Court and from other federal circuits.

Decision: Pending

Counsel:

Jones Day

Courts:

U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit

Case #: 22-1043

View PDF

Amicus brief

Confessions, Interrogations & Interviewing

False Confessions

Shaken Baby Syndrome

Unreliable Forensic Science

Lucio, Melissa v. State of Texas (2022)

Position: State habeas relief should be granted where prosecution relied on false and scientifically unreliable evidence, and where the jury was not able to consider scientific evidence tending to show that the confession was false.

Decision: Pending

Counsel:

Cravath, Swaine & Moore, LLP; Gibbs & Bruns, LLP

Courts:

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas (Austin, TX)

Case #: 07-CR-00885

View PDF

Amicus brief

Unreliable Forensic Science

New Evidence of Innocence

Shaken Baby Syndrome

Shelby, Tasha Mercedez v. State of Mississippi (2022)

Position: The use of faulty forensic evidence in criminal trials is a serious, recurring problem in the criminal justice system. When scientific understanding changes, especially when such understanding leads to a critical trial expert’s powerful repudiation of prior testimony, an opportunity exists to remedy the mistakes of the past.

Decision: Pending

Counsel:

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Courts:

U.S. District Court (Southern District of Mississippi)

Case #: 1:21cv406 HSO-RPM

View PDF

Amicus brief

Police or Prosecutorial Misconduct

State/Federal Habeas Corpus Rules & Procedures

Other Issues

Bethel, Robert, State of Ohio v. (2020)

Position: There is no defendant diligence requirement in Brady claims.

Decision: Decided 11/2/20; Affirmed the judgment of the court of appeals and denied Bethel's motion for leave to file a motion for a new trial.

Counsel:

Jones Day

Courts:

Supreme Court of Ohio

View PDF

Amicus brief

Unreliable Forensic Science

Shaken Baby Syndrome

In Re Personal Restraint of Leon L. Reyes (2021)

Position: Faulty forensic evidence leads to wrongful convictions, which the judiciary can, and should, remedy through new trials; there has been a paradigm shift in the relevant scientific community pertaining to SBS/AHT diagnoses; new evidence undermining the SBS/AHT hypothesis is grounds for a new trial.

Decision: Decided 3/15/22; Affirmed the reference hearing findings, dismissed the personal restraint petition and denied the request to strike Dr. Wood's declaration and the request for sanctions.

Counsel:

Crowell and Moring, LLP

Courts:

Washington State Court of Appeals

Case #: 52449-0

View PDF

Amicus brief

Unreliable Forensic Science

Parks, Joann v. Janel Espinoza (2021)

Position: The case against Ms. Parks relied upon unreliable expert testimony regarding outdated theories of forensic fire science grounded in discredited forensic techniques and her conviction must be reversed. This brief also includes an argument regarding the bias against female defendants.

Decision: Pending

Counsel:

Duane Morris LLP

Courts:

California Court of Appeal, Second District

Case #: B296998

View PDF

Amicus brief

Access to Evidence

Unreliable Forensic Science

Biggs, Jay L., State of Ohio v. (2021)

Position: Wrongfully Convicted Defendants Cannot Vindicate Their Due Process Liberty Interest in Proving Their Innocence on Post-Conviction Review Without Access to the Scientific or Medical Evidence.

Decision: Pending

Counsel:

Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP

Courts:

Ohio Supreme Court

Case #: 2021-0113

View PDF

of 20

The Innocence Network is an coalition of organizations dedicated to providing pro bono legal and investigative services to individuals seeking to prove innocence of crimes for which they have been convicted, working to redress the causes of wrongful convictions, and supporting the exonerated after they are freed.

CATEGORIESWho We Are Getting Involved Joining the Network Seeking Assistance Resources

RESEARCH REQUESTS

AMICUS REQUESTS

Want to get in touch?Reach out to our team

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. Read our cookies policies here.