Brief Bank

Below are amicus briefs either filed by the Innocence Network, or by individual Network project members, on issues that have been endorsed by the Innocence Network Board of Directors.

Issue: Unreliable Forensic Science

Ford, Glenn (2007)

Counsel: Innocence Network by Sidley Austin
Court: Louisiana trial court
Case Number:
Position: - Challenges to unsound forensic sciences should be basis for granting a new trial.
Issues: Unreliable Forensic Science


Melendez-Diaz, Luis v. Massachusetts (2008)

Counsel: Innocence Network
Court: U.S. Supreme Court
Case Number: 07-591
Position: - Arguing that crime laboratory reports are "testimonial" within the meaning of Crawford v. Washington, and hence inadmissible unless presented by live testimony of the author subject to cross-examination under the confrontation clause.
Issues: Unreliable Forensic Science


Siller, Thomas v. State of Ohio (2008)

Counsel: Innocence Network
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals, Eighth Appellate District
Case Number: 08-90865
Position: - New trial should be granted where conviction rested on snitch testimony and fraudulent forensic science.
Issues: New Evidence of Innocence Unreliable Forensic Science