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: Eyewitness Identification

Davis, Troy, State v. (2007)

Counsel: Innocence Network, Georgia Innocence Project, Wisconsin Innocence Project
Court: Georgia Supreme Court
Case Number: S07A-1758
Position:
Issues: Eyewitness Identification

Dubose, Tyrone, State v. (2005)

Counsel: Wisconsin Innocence Project
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Case Number: 03-1690-CR
Position: - Showup evidence should be inadmissible in all cases unless state can prove that a showup was truly necessary. Courts should abandon or modify the Brathwaite/Biggers five-prong test for evaluating "reliability" of suggestive eyewitness identification procedures.
Issues: Eyewitness Identification

Ford, Tony Egbuna v. Dretke (2005)

Counsel: Center on Wrongful convictions
Court: U.S. Supreme Court
Case Number:
Position: - Expert testimony on eyewitness identifications should be per se admissible in any case in which disputed eyewitness evidence is presented.
Issues: Eyewitness Identification

Ledbetter, Laquan, State v (2005)

Counsel: Innocence Project, Center on Wrongful Convictions, Wisconsin Innocence Project, North Carolina Center on Actual Innocence, Northern California Innocence Project
Court: Supreme Court of Connecticut
Case Number: S.C. 17307
Position: - Courts should adopt a rule that failure to caution a witness that the culprit might not be present at an identification procedure renders that procedure unnecessarily suggestive, requiring, at the very least, a curative jury instruction.
Issues: Eyewitness Identification

National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers v. Superintendent of Chicago Police Department (2009)

Counsel: Innocence Network (by Dickstein Shapiro)
Court: Appellate Court of Illinois
Case Number: 1-08-2073, 1-08-3414
Position:
Issues: Eyewitness Identification

Perez, Jose Antonio v. U.S. (2006)

Counsel: Innocence Network (by Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher)
Court: U.S. Supreme Court
Case Number:
Position: - Courts should abandon or modify the Brathwaite/Biggers five-prong test for evaluating "reliability" of suggestive eyewitness identification procedures.
Issues: Eyewitness Identification

Shomberg, Forest, State v. (2005)

Counsel: Wisconsin Innocence Project
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Case Number: 2004AP630-CR
Position: - Expert testimony on eyewitness identifications should be per se admissible in any case in which disputed eyewitness evidence is presented.
Issues: Eyewitness Identification