Additional resources include spreadsheets that accompanied “Convicting the Innocent.”
Accompanying Chapter 2, this false_confessions_appendix details the forensic testimony in cases of the first 250 DNA exonerations. An earlier law review article described the false confessions by DNA exonerees. See Brandon L. Garrett, “The Substance of False Confessions,” 62 Stan. L. Rev. 1051 (2010). A more recent article updated those findings. Brandon L. Garrett, Confession Contamination Redux, 101 Va. L. Rev. 395 (2014).
Accompanying Chapter 3, this eyewitness_appendix details the eyewitness testimony in the first 250 DNA exonerations.
Accompanying Chapter 4, this forensics_appendix details the forensic testimony in the cases of the first 250 DNA exonerations. An earlier law review article describe the forensic testimony in trials of DNA exonerees. See Brandon L. Garrett & Peter J. Neufeld, “Invalid Forensic Science Testimony and Wrongful Convictions,” 95 Va. L. Rev. 1 (2009).
Accompanying Chapter 5, this informants_appendix details the testimony of informants and other incentivized witnesses in the cases of the first 250 DNA exonerations.
Accompanying Chapter 6, this defense_case_appendix details the defense case at trial among the first 250 DNA exonerations.
Accompanying Chapter 7, this appendix details the appeals and post-conviction litigation by the first 250 DNA exonerations. This research also provides an update to data first presented in “Judging Innocence,” 108 Colum. L. Rev. 55 (2008). The “Judging Innocence” study reviewed the first 200 post-conviction DNA exonerations. An appendix accompanied that article.
Accompanying Chapter 8, this postconviction_dna_testing appendix details how the first 250 DNA exonerations obtained postconviction DNA testing. The appendix first notes for each exoneree whether the prosecutor ultimately consented or opposed the request for post-conviction DNA testing. Some cases marked “consent” include cases in which the prosecutor initially opposed testing but ultimately joined in the motion. Similarly, on the issue of consent or opposition to the motion to vacate the conviction, “consent” included cases in which initial opposition was followed by the prosecutor formally joining in the motion.
Summary statistics begin at the bottom of the file in orange cells. Findings include that in the first 250 post-conviction DNA exonerations, prosecutors consented to DNA testing in 81 percent of cases in which information was obtained on the subject (170 of 210 cases) and opposed it in 19 percent (40 of 210 cases), with no information available in 40 cases.
Prosecutors eventually joined in the motions to vacate the convictions in 88% of cases in which information was obtained on the subject (171 of 194 cases) and opposed the motions in 12% (23 of 194 cases), with no information available (or no vacatur proceedings held) in 56 cases.
State courts issued 97 percent of court orders for postconviction relief (205), while only 4 percent (9) were by federal courts (of those two were issued by both state and federal courts.)
Post-conviction DNA testing inculpated the actual perpetrator in 112 cases, of which 65 involved a “cold hit” in a DNA database. Sixty-eight exonerees received a pardon.