1. 7/10/2015 A National Effort to Improve State Post­Conviction DNA Testing Laws for the Innocent — The Innocence Project
http://www.innocenceproject.org/news­events­exonerations/a­national­effort­to­improve­state­post­conviction­dna­testing­laws­for­the­innocent 1/4
Personal tools
Search Site Search Search
Advanced Search…
Facebook Twitter YouTube Pinterest RSS
The Cases
The Causes
Our Work
News & Events
Get Involved
About Us
Donate
Home > News & Events > A National Effort to Improve State Post­Conviction DNA Testing Laws for
the Innocent
A National Effort to Improve State Post­
Conviction DNA Testing Laws for the Innocent
Share This:
Posted: July 10, 2015 2:46 PM
By Michelle Feldman, state policy advocate
When DNA technology first emerged, it provided little help to the wrongfully convicted who often had
exhausted all of their appeals and lacked statutory access to the DNA testing that could prove their
innocence. Over the past two decades, all 50 states have adopted laws aimed at providing a clear legal
avenue for the wrongfully convicted to access this crime­solving technology. However, despite the fact
that DNA testing has exonerated 330 people and identified 142 real perpetrators, some of these laws
contain more barriers than pathways to justice. The Innocence Project recently embarked upon a
campaign to improve post­conviction DNA testing laws to ensure fair and meaningful access for the
innocent.
In some states, such as Oregon and Montana, defendants must meet a high standard of proof that
essentially requires them to demonstrate innocence before a court can grant testing. This is a Catch­22

2. 7/10/2015 A National Effort to Improve State Post­Conviction DNA Testing Laws for the Innocent — The Innocence Project
http://www.innocenceproject.org/news­events­exonerations/a­national­effort­to­improve­state­post­conviction­dna­testing­laws­for­the­innocent 2/4
because the entire point of testing is to determine innocence after the results are in. The high standard has
made it nearly impossible to access testing in both states. In Oregon, only one person has obtained testing
since the law was enacted in 2001, and in Montana not a single request has been granted under the 2003
statute. Working with our local partners—the Oregon Innocence Project and Montana Innocence Project
—we successfully lobbied lawmakers to fix the laws and create a more reasonable standard of review for
a court to grant DNA testing.
Another limitation is that some state laws prohibit testing if DNA technology was available, but not
conducted, at the time of the defendant’s original trial. In Nebraska, exoneree Ted Bradford made a
compelling case at a legislative hearing for why the law should be changed. Ted spent 10 years in a
Washington state prison for a rape he did not commit and was exonerated after testing on a mask worn by
the perpetrator excluded him. He explained that under Nebraska’s law, a court might not have granted the
testing that helped clear his name because the mask and DNA technology were both available at his trial,
although the evidence was not tested. Thanks to his testimony and the work of the Nebraska Innocence
Project the law was changed to remove this restriction.
Some state laws restrict the categories of people who are eligible for testing. As of last year, 14 states had
an “incarceration requirement,” meaning that a defendant had to be behind bars to qualify for testing.
While leaving prison may end one nightmare for an innocent person, he or she will likely continue to
suffer the collateral consequences of a wrongful conviction including barriers to housing and
employment, sex offender registration and social stigma. This year Montana, Oregon and Rhode Island
passed laws removing the “incarceration requirement.” In New Jersey, a bill that would eliminate this
restriction has passed the legislature and is awaiting action by Governor Christie.
In other states, testing is only accessible to defendants who committed certain types of crimes. In
Maryland, eligibility was restricted to people convicted of murder, manslaughter and sexual assault. With
the help of our partners at the University of Baltimore Innocence Project Clinic and the Mid­Atlantic
Innocence Project, the law was expanded to permit testing for other violent felonies, such as robbery or
kidnapping.
Another shortcoming in some state laws is the burden of proof required to test certain kinds of evidence.
In 2014, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled in State v. Swearingen that defendants must prove
the existence of microscopic material, such as skin cells or saliva, on evidence before testing may be
granted—which is nearly impossible because it is invisible to the naked eye. However, two months later
in State v. Holberg, the court noted an uncertainty in the law. To provide the guidance requested by the
court, the Innocence Project worked with Senator Rodney Ellis to revise the law so that it clarifies that
testing may be granted on key crime scene evidence “that has a reasonable likelihood of containing
biological material.”

3. 7/10/2015 A National Effort to Improve State Post­Conviction DNA Testing Laws for the Innocent — The Innocence Project
http://www.innocenceproject.org/news­events­exonerations/a­national­effort­to­improve­state­post­conviction­dna­testing­laws­for­the­innocent 3/4
Thanks to the work of our network partners, committed lawmakers and Innocence Project supporters who
reached out to their state representatives, wrongfully convicted people in these states will have a better
chance of accessing DNA testing. We will continue working to strengthen laws across the country to
ensure that post­conviction DNA testing is accessible to the innocent. It’s a matter of justice and public
safety.
Add comment
You can add a comment by filling out the form below. Plain text formatting.
Name
Comment
Captcha
Comment
More Headlines RSS
Children Sent to Juvenile Detention for Refusing to Visit Their Father
Maryland Court of Appeals Helps Protect Innocent
David Keaton, First Death Row Exoneree and Lifelong Advocate for Justice, Dies at 63
Oklahoma Innocence Project Files for Post­Conviction Relief for Tulsa Man
Although Freedom Eludes Him, Darryl Howard Presses On
Get our daily news update in your email!
Click here to sign up for daily updates of innocence news from our blog. >>
Join the Movement
Join with the 65,000 people who are committed to helping free the innocent.
email
Subscribe
Common Causes
Eyewitness Misidentification
Privacy & Terms
Type the text

4. 7/10/2015 A National Effort to Improve State Post­Conviction DNA Testing Laws for the Innocent — The Innocence Project
http://www.innocenceproject.org/news­events­exonerations/a­national­effort­to­improve­state­post­conviction­dna­testing­laws­for­the­innocent 4/4
False Confessions or Admissions
Government Misconduct
Unvalidated or Improper Forensic Science
Informants
Inadequate Defense
Contact Us
About Us
Privacy Policy
Legal