Inmates have no Constitutional right to test DNA evidence that could prove their innocence, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.
In a 5-to-4 decision, the justices ruled against William G. Osborne, a convicted rapist in Alaska, who sought access to a blue condom used in his trial.
DNA evidence has been used to exonerate at least 232 people in recent years, often after spending years in prison.
At least 46 states and the federal government allow for some access for DNA testing after a conviction, but the Supreme Court declined to extend that right.
"DNA testing has an unparalleled ability both to exonerate the wrongly convicted and to identify the guilty," Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority. "The availability of new DNA testing, however, cannot mean that every criminal conviction, or even every conviction involving biological evidence, is suddenly in doubt."
Osborne's attorney declined to test the DNA evidence at his trial, fearing the evidence would prove his guilt, but later sued to obtain tests.
In the dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that Alaska was arbitrarily withholding evidence that "will conclusively establish" Osborne's guilt or innocence, citing "a fundamental concern in ensuring that justice has been done in this case."
Osborne and another man were convicted of abducting, raping and attempting to murder a prostitute, then leaving her for dead in a snow bank near Anchorage International Airport in 1993. The victim identified Osborne as her attacker, who also later confessed his guilt to an Alaska parole board.
Chris Kramer
ckramer@totalattorneys.com
http://www.totalcriminaldefense.com/blog
Comment and add to the story without registration, but keep the comments meaningful please. Links are not accepted.
