Wednesday, March 04, 2009

Actual Innocence, DNA Testing, Sec. 1983, Osborne in the Supreme Court

At this link is the transcript of oral argument in the Supreme Court in the Osborne DNA case from Alaska in which the government argues that new evidence in the form of DNA testing should be denied, remain untouched, apparently in the interests of "finality", one, because 1983 civil claim is not the appropriate way to ask for it, and it is more of a discovery request, and prisoner does not have a federal constitutional right to his own DNA for testing, and because he refuses to swear unde penalty of perjury that he is actually innocent and has confessed twice, and remarkably, that there is no right to present new evidence that shows, or could show, your actual innocence (more to come) -- HuH?

I took some notes yesterday and stupidly kept thinking I'd return to post to the blog and didn't so it's lost, only to be retrieved from memory. Perhaps I'll not bother. Now to return to finish reading the transcript...,

For now, let's just say that this case tests whether or not there is a constitutional right to obtain evidence of actual innocence that is in the possession of the state.

Doc Berman's post on the case has the usual good commentary, here.

No comments: