Innocence Project

Both Rhode Island and Oregon recently expanded their laws allowing for DNA testing by people trying to prove they were wrongfully convicted.

Both states have enacted laws to expand access to DNA testing for people convicted of a crime who are no longer in prison, The Oregonian's Maxine Bernstein and The Providence Journal's Katie Mulvaney respectively report.

Steve T. Wax, legal director of Oregon's Innocence Project, told Bernstein that Oregon's law was one of the most restrictive in the country. In that state, the standard to get post-conviction DNA testing will now be showing there is a reasonable possibility that testing would lead to a finding of actual innocence.

Texas has enacted a law making it easier for convicted defendants to get DNA testing, according to the Innocence Project.

People who have been convicted of crimes now have to show that there a reasonable likelihood that evidence contains DNA, Texas Lawyer's Angela Morris reports. The law was enacted in response to Texas Court of Criminal Appeals rulings strictly interpreting Texas' "post-conviction DNA testing statute 'to require proof that biological evidence exists before a judge can allow testing to see if exculpatory biological evidence exists. This new interpretation severely restricts a judge's ability to order DNA testing … which in turn prevents the discovery of exonerations in cases where exculpatory evidence is often microscopic,'" Morris reports.

In the 14 years since Oregon enacted a law to allow defendants to get DNA testing to show they might be innocent, only two have gotten judges to approve such testing. As a result, legislators in Oregon have introduced a bill to reform the state's DNA testing law for defendants, Oregon Public Broadcasting's Amelia Templeton reports.

Under current law, defendants have to show that DNA testing on specific pieces of evidence would conclusively prove their innocence. The new bill would relax the standard, requiring defendants to "present a theory of defense supported by DNA evidence, and prove that a favorable DNA result would lead to finding that person would not have been convicted if the testing had been done before their trial," Templeton reports.

Alstory Simon was freed after serving 15 years for a double murder after prosecutors questioned the evidence against him, Slate's Beth Ethier reports. Now Simon is suing a former journalism professor that once led an Innocence Project class at the Medill School of Journalism, his defense attorney and a private investigator. Simon alleges that the defendants conspired to get him to confess to a fatal shooting for which then-professor David Protess' students sought to exonerate another man.

Last year, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that a death row inmate couldn't get DNA testing on evidence in his case because he didn't prove that it contained biological material. According to the Associated Press, now a Texas lawmaker has proposed a reform to the crime-scene DNA testing law that he authored to allow any convicted person to request testing on "evidence that is reasonably likely to contain biological material," not just of evidence that "'containing biological material.'"

California Governor Jerry Brown has vetoed a bill that would have allowed judges to inform juries when a prosecutor has intentionally withheld evidence, according to the San Francisco Bay Guardian. Assemblymember Tom Ammiano, sponsor of the bill, said in a statement "we need this bill to stop the few prosecutors whose zeal for convictions lead them to cut corners on justice. We can’t wait decades to free the innocent while the true perpetrators run free.” Brown said he was vetoing the bill because it would intrude upon the judiciary's role in instructing juries.

The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles voted last week not to recommend a posthumous pardon for Cameron Todd Willingham, who was put to death after being convicted of killing his daughters in a housefire, the Texas Tribune reports. The Innocence Project argued new evidence showed the prosecutor who convicted Willingham might have made a deal with a jailhouse informant who testified against Willingham, even though the informant testified he received nothing in exchange for his testimony, the Tribune also reports.

Todd Willingham was executed a decade ago after he was convicted of setting a house fire that killed his three daughters, the Texas Tribune reports. Lawyers from the Innocence Project have already cited faulty science regarding the cause of the fire being arson. Now they say a note shows that the presiding prosecutor made a deal with a jailhouse informant even though the informant testified he received nothing in exchange for his testimony, The Tribune further reports.

West Virginia's MetroNews reports that the WVU Law Innocence Project is "pushing legislation at the capitol which would require all police interrogations to be video recorded. Supporters of the bill believe it will reduce the chances of false confessions and ultimately false convictions."

Recording confessions is now considered a best practice to prevent innocent people from falsely confessing to crimes they didn't commit or being wrongfully convicted of crimes they didn't commit.

West Virginia has passed legislation establishing protocols to ensure investigating officers don't influence witnesses during lineups, MetroNews also reported.

Vermont is considering two pieces of legislation to seek the prevention of wrongful convictions. One bill would require blind lineups "in which the officer conducting them doesn’t know which participant is the suspect and therefore can’t influence the witness," The Rutland Herald reports. The other bill would call for taping police interogations in homicide and sexual-assault interrogations, the paper further reports.