The Impact of DNA Evidence on Post-Conviction Relief Cases

DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) evidence is an essential part of many criminal cases, but it is just as important in reexamining criminal cases and overturning wrongful convictions. The advancements in DNA analysis have helped many individuals in their fight for post-conviction relief and allowed them to secure the exoneration they deserve.

A reexamination of DNA evidence under new methods can shed light on testimonial inconsistencies, police or prosecutorial misconduct, and inaccurate or false witness testimony. There are many successful cases of exoneration. Unfortunately, there are many challenges in presenting and using this evidence in an appeal or another form of post-conviction relief.

Improvements in DNA Evidence and Testing

DNA testing has evolved over time, particularly since the 1990s, providing improved accuracy on tests and requiring less DNA at the scene to be a viable method of investigation. DNA evidence from past cases that may have previously been unusable can now be analyzed using new methods. Next-generation sequencing and genetic genealogy can provide comprehensive DNA evidence from deteriorated or trace amounts of a sample.

These evolving techniques can allow for new DNA evidence in old cases to be uncovered, or old samples can be re-tested with new and more accurate methods. This may be the difference between being falsely convicted and being found innocent.

When DNA Testing Has Overturned Wrongful Convictions and Led to Exonerations

There are numerous cases where DNA testing after conviction has enabled wrongly convicted individuals to be exonerated.

Jeffery Deskovic

In 1990 in New York, Jeffery Deskovic was convicted at 17 years old of the rape and murder of a 15-year-old girl based on a false confession after six hours of questioning. Despite DNA testing not matching Deskovic, the prosecution continued the case, and he was convicted. In 2006, the evidence was re-tested, the implicated party confessed, and Deskovic was found innocent and released after 16 years of imprisonment.

Damon Thibodaux

In 1996 in Louisiana, Damon Thibodaux was convicted of the rape and murder of his cousin on the basis of a false confession given after nine hours of interrogation. No physical evidence tied him to the crime. In 2007, DNA evidence was reexamined and found not to match Thibodaux. In 2012, he was exonerated after 16 years of imprisonment and 15 years on death row.

David McCallum

At 16, David McCallum and Willie Stuckey were convicted of murder in 1985 in New York based on false confessions. No physical evidence linked either boy to the crime. In 2014, after 29 years of being imprisoned, McCallum was exonerated of the offense. Stuckey’s conviction was also overturned, but sadly, Stuckey had died in prison in 2001.

The Beatrice Six

Six individuals were found guilty in 1989 of the rape and murder of a woman in Beatrice, Nebraska. In 2009, all six individuals, called the Beatrice Six, were exonerated. Five of the individuals were coerced into providing false confessions under the threat of the death penalty.

These false confessions were used to find all six individuals guilty. The forensic scientist on the case was never called to give testimony on her analysis, which would have contradicted their confessions. In 2008, DNA evidence was reexamined on the demand of one of the six individuals, Joseph White, and the evidence implicated another suspect. The six individuals were released and exonerated after 20 years of imprisonment.

Challenges in Applying New DNA Evidence to Post-Conviction Cases

Many attorneys, advocacy groups, and other organizations fight to help those who are wrongfully convicted. This help is crucial because the legal system is much harder to navigate after a conviction. After a guilty verdict, many people face hurdles when trying to re-open or re-examine their case.

After a conviction, an individual no longer has the presumption of innocence. During the case, the prosecution has the burden of proof, but the defendant has the burden of proof after conviction. To succeed in a post-conviction case, the wrongly convicted individual must prove that the evidence will support their innocence.

Several challenges in securing DNA evidence and reexamination after conviction include:

1. Accessing DNA testing. It can be difficult or impossible for a convicted individual to request DNA testing, depending on the state. Some laws require proof that the DNA evidence will prove innocence before the test is granted. Laws may also have short deadlines by which testing has to be requested. Meeting these or other legal standards is a difficult challenge that can be impossible to overcome without proper help.
2. Evidence preservation. The evidence necessary to perform DNA tests is frequently lost, contaminated, or destroyed. Forensic evidence may have been discarded once a conviction was secured, particularly in older cases when DNA testing was less essential. If evidence has been thrown out, it can be impossible to overturn a conviction through DNA evidence.
3. Opposition from the prosecution. Prosecutors may fight against the reexamination of evidence, making it harder to test DNA evidence and take other post-conviction actions. The prosecution could argue that the other evidence in the case is enough for a conviction or that the conviction was already backed through an appellate court. Some prosecutors do not want to admit wrongdoing or have their prosecution record questioned.
4. Financial burdens. Aside from legal challenges, the financial burdens of the post-conviction process are significant. The cost of DNA testing may be placed on the defendant, on top of the many other costs of legal support, court costs, fines, and post-conviction support. Individuals may lose years of their lives in jail because they cannot afford the cost of a DNA test.
5. Admissibility standards. Legal procedures must be followed, both during the request for DNA evidence and the preservation of the evidence. If these requirements are not followed, the DNA evidence may be deemed inadmissible. Tissue preservation and testing techniques, among other specifics, must be done properly in order for the DNA evidence to be accepted by the court.

All of these challenges can make it even more difficult for individuals already going through an overwhelming, stressful time. Wrongly convicted individuals and their families need to work with the right defense attorneys and advocacy organizations to ensure they have the most resources and support possible.

Take Post-Conviction Steps Quickly

Wrongful convictions are not the end of the criminal justice system. If you or someone you loved has been wrongfully convicted, you have options. At NLPA, we provide individuals and families with information and resources, and we provide research for defense attorneys navigating the post-conviction process. The team at NLPA believes in supporting individuals and fighting for justice. Contact our organization today.