Amicus Brief Bank

Position: The right to present a complete defense (under the compulsory process clause of the 6th amendment and the due process clause of the 14th amendment) is violated when a court improperly limits the presentation of a complete defense, regardless of whether the limitations were arbitrary or systematic, and the Fifth Circuit wrongly limited violations of this right to instances where the limitations were systematic. Second, false confessions are a leading cause of wrongful convictions, and certain police practices are known to create a high risk of false confessions.

Position: Fingerprinting during a Terry stop is an unlawful seizure under the 4th Amendment, particularly in the context of youth.

Position: Informant testimony is fraught with reliability problems, is a leading cause of wrongful conviction and must be carefully scrutinized through cross-examination

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.

Position: The SBS/AHT hypothesis is unsound and therefore poses a serious risk of wrongful conviction. The hypothesis is no longer supported by reliable scientific evidence, and it has been shown to result in false accusations and convictions.

Position: Case concerns the Court of Appeals’ recognition of the effect that the word “abusive” has on a jury’s verdict in so-called abusive head trauma (“AHT”) prosecutions.

Position: Cases based on the SBS/AHT hypothesis pose a serious risk of judicial error, especially where the evidence is presented in an incomplete or asymmetric manner.

Position: Challenges to unsound forensic sciences should be basis for granting a new trial.

Position: The actual innocence gateway applies to AEDPA’s statute of limitations.

Position: Post-conviction petitioners, who can establish their actual innocence through newly-discovered evidence of any type, are entitled to seek relief.