Expert Reports on Low Rates of Sex Offense Recidivism and the Counterproductive Impact of Sex Offender Registration and Notification (SORN) Requirements on Public Safety, Deterrence, and Recidivism
The ACLU of Michigan included these reports as exhibits in its recent litigation attacking the constitutionality of Michigan’s Sex Offenders Registration Act (SORA). Does v. Whitmer (Does III), No. 22-cv-10209 (E.D. Mich.). The research cited in these reports — specifically on the low risk of recidivism among people convicted of sexual offenses and the counterproductive impact […]
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 […]
p. 51-56 cite research on general inefficacy of jury instructions
Studies demonstrate that pre-trial publicity impacts decision-making and individual questioning about content exposure is necessary in cases involving substantial, prejudicial pre-trial publicity
p. 30 – 37 discuss studies of implicit bias and the ways that racial cues – like a prosecutor characterizing a Black man as ‘angry’ – can “automatically affect a broad range of decisions and behaviors” within juries.
Incorporates studies on implicit bias generally, as well as specifically within jury panels
Filed by the Innocence Project, this brief details research demonstrating that hair microscopy evidence does not meet the standards of reliable scientific evidence, as well as research showing how persuasive forensic testimony is to juries.
Amicus Brief – Courts should exclude “criminal profiling” and non-scientific “crime scene analysis” evidence
Summarizes research on accuracy of “criminal profiling” evidence over forty years, concluding profilers are no “better than bartenders at predicting the traits and features of offenders.” Also provides an overview of cases nationwide excluding criminal profiling evidence and finding that its major premise is faulty and essentially propensity evidence.
“When jurors are presented with evidence that is particularly gruesome, they are likely to experience a visceral emotionally charged feeling that leads them to be inappropriately punitive.” Incorporates studies demonstrating that exposure to gruesome evidence decreases the brain’s capacity for logical reasoning.
p. 22-38 discuss the use of 404(b) “other acts” evidence and why evidence of drug possession is not relevant to intent to distribute drugs. The brief goes on to outline research demonstrating that such “other acts” evidence is highly likely to improperly prejudice the jury in a way that cannot be cured by a limiting […]