Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals adopted a standard of review for DNA testing appeals this week. The court established in Tuesday's U.S. v. Pitera decision that the question of whether a prisoner is entitled to DNA testing under the Innocence Protection Act is subject to de novo review.
De novo re view, however, was not enough to help Thomas Pitera win his DNA testing request.
To justify post-conviction DNA testing under the Innocence Protection Act, the court that entered the judgment of conviction must make nine findings:
In Pitera's case, the district court and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals denied post-conviction DNA testing because it would not produce new evidence of Pitera's innocence.
Pitera requested post-conviction DNA testing on six items, claiming that the tests would prove that Frank Gangi, (who admitted to being Pitera's accomplice in the crimes), was the real killer.
The Second Circuit disagreed, finding, "Even if the [evidence] did not show Pitera, but rather showed DNA only of Gangi and the victims, such a showing would not 'raise a reasonable probability that [Pitera] did not commit the offense'" because the government had alleged that Gangi committed the murders with Pitera.
It's harder to win post-conviction DNA testing when the government has previously established that two people participated in a crime. The Innocence Protection Act cannot help a defendant prevail on a motion to compel testing unless the testing would prove innocence.
Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.