A Project of the University of Michigan Law School and the MDefenders Program

Amicus Brief in Support of Excluding Firearm and Toolmark (FA/TM) Identification Evidence

This brief explains why expert testimony on firearm and toolmark (FA/TM) identification should be excluded. FA/TM identification is premised on the unproven assumption that each firearm leaves unique, accidental, and individualized markings on spent ammunition despite evidence from several studies that this analysis lacks sound estimates of error rates, is characterized as subjective pathological science, […]

Amicus Brief Arguing that Descriptive Statistics Alone Satisfy Threshold for a Hearing Under California Racial Justice Act

Pages 17-24 and 32-33 collect research and argue that descriptive statistics – statistical analyses that do not control for other factors – can establish the possibility of racial bias and trigger an evidentiary hearing under the California Racial Justice Act and that regression analyses that account for potential confounding variables provide strong evidence of racial […]

Amicus brief argues in a family defense case that courts should not equate parental substance use with “substance abuse” absent a clinical diagnosis of a Substance Use Disorder (SUD) consistent with the DSM-5-TR

This brief argues that, contrary to stereotypes, drug use alone—even frequent or illicit use—does not necessarily indicate substance abuse (pp. 23, 28-29). Only a minority of users develop a diagnosable SUD (p. 23). A single positive drug test is insufficient to establish a SUD (p. 29). And equating substance use, even a SUD, with substantial […]

Petition for Relief under Racial Justice Act

This motion incorporates studies of implicit bias and racially discriminatory policing in San Diego. Studies referenced describe disparities in how police speak to drivers of different races as well as disparities in post-stop outcomes.

Motion to Exclude Prior Convictions as Impermissibly Prejudicial

Details the dilemma that admitting a prior felony conviction results in: if the defendant testifies and his conviction is introduced, research shows there is a heightened risk that the jury will use the prior conviction to “draw an impermissible inference.” However, if the defendant chooses not to testify in order to prevent his conviction from […]

Amicus Brief – Court should consider race in a “reasonable person” analysis

Incorporating statistical evidence of racial disparities in police stops and police violence, this brief argues that “what constitutes “suspicious” or “abnormal” behavior for Fourth Amendment purposes must take into account the realities of racism and police violence experienced by communities of color” and that any totality of the circumstances analysis must consider “the fraught, frightening, […]