CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Criminal Law Blog by Defense Lawyer John Floyd and Mr. Billy Sinclair

January 5, 2012

“JUNK SCIENCE” ONCE AGAIN PUTS TEXAS IN NATIONAL FOREFRONT

Filed under: Houston Criminal Lawyer — Tags: , , , — johntfloyd @ 5:31 pm

Defense Lawyers Need to Challenge Questionable Expert Testimony and Conclusions

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

In October 2010 we posted piece titled “Dog Witnesses Kicked Out of the Courtroom” concerning a capital murder case in San Jacinto County. The accused, all members of the same family—Richard Lynn Winfrey Sr. and his son, Richard Jr., and daughter, Megan—were arrested in 2006 for the brutal murder of Murray Wayne Burr, a longtime custodial worker at the high school attended by the Winfrey siblings. Local law enforcement officials considered Winfrey and his two children as “persons of interests” shortly after Burr was murdered in his home, even though DNA evidence found at scene excluded the Winfreys. The proverbial “break in the case” came in 2006 when Richard Sr., who was housed in the Montgomery County jail, told another inmate David Campbell that “some kind of gun and some kind of knife collection” had been taken from Burr’s home, as well as other details about the murder, including the victim’s body being dragged from one room to another. Campbell repeated this information to the authorities.

This new information spurred San Jacinto County investigators into action. Not deterred by the fact that the DNA evidence excluded the Winfreys, the police turned to what they believed was infallible science—the nose of specially trained dogs. They called in a renowned law enforcement bloodhound “expert” named Keith Pickett to conduct what is called a “dog scent lineup.” The lineup was conducted in 2007 at which time Pickett used three of his hounds: Quincy, James Bond, and Clue. Investigators provided Pickett with a scent sample from clothing worn by the victim on the night he was murdered and scent samples from six white males, including Richard Sr. All three dogs were “pre-scented” with the scent from the victim’s clothing. The dogs were then paraded past six paint cans containing the scent samples of the six white males. All three dogs “alerted” on the paint can containing Richard Sr.’s scent sample and later “alerted” on Richard Jr. and Megan’s scent sample as well. All three were tried and convicted of murder.

In 2009 the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, in Winfrey v. State, threw out Richard Sr.’s conviction, saying the dog “scent” identification was insufficient evidence upon which to base a criminal conviction. The Texas Tribune reported on December 4, 2011 that Richard Jr.’s conviction has also been thrown out. Both men have been released from prison. And the Court of Criminal Appeals will soon decide Megan’s fate, most likely with the same result reached in other two Winfrey cases. She is now into her third year of a life sentence.

On December 15, 2011 the Texas Tribune also reported that the Court of Criminal Appeals had remanded two death penalty cases (Steven Butler and John Matamoros) back to the trial courts for review of the evidence used to determine they were “intellectually competent” to stand trial.

(more…)

October 29, 2011

ANOTHER INNOCENT MAN FREED AFTER MISTAKEN IDENTIFICATION

Innocence Project Strikes Again: Henry James Freed After 30 Years

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

Thanks to the efforts of the New York-based Innocence Project, Henry James became the 273rd inmate in this country to be exonerated by DNA evidence. The first inmate exonerated by DNA came in 1989, and according to the Innocence Project, there have been 206 DNA exonerations since 2000. James, who was 20 years of age when arrested for the aggravated rape of a neighbor, served one month sigh of 30 years in the Louisiana prison system for that wrongful conviction. The average amount of time served by all the DNA exonerees is 13 years.

That Henry James is a free man today is nothing short of a miracle. James Trigg, director of the New Orleans chapter of the Innocence Project, spearheaded the release effort of James. It was a difficult effort, as Trigg told the AP, because it was believed that all the original evidence in the case was lost. Then in May 2010 a Jefferson Parish crime lab technician named Milton Dureau, who was working on another case, stumbled upon a “slide of evidence” which had been used in the James case. DNA testing of that evidence clearly established James’ innocence. Vanessa Potkin, a Senior Staff attorney with the Innocence Project, said after James’ exoneration:

“Far too often searches for DNA evidence in old cases come up empty handed, which is why the federal government set up the Bloodsworth grant program to help police crime labs catalogue evidence. New Orleans Parish has already taken advantage of this program, but as this case so clearly demonstrates, jurisdictions everywhere must do a better job of cataloguing evidence to help correct injustice.”

After exhausting all his legal appeals, James seemed destined to spend the rest of his life at the Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola. Then the Innocence Project and the law firm of Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP believed his longstanding pleas of innocence and took up his freedom cause. This legal team filed a motion seeking DNA testing of the original “rape kit,” and while the Jefferson Parish crime lab was “cooperative,” the initial search for this evidence produced no results. A follow up search in February 2010 produced the same disheartening result. But then Dureau came across the “slide” evidence and the DNA test results released in September 2011 revealed James was, in fact, innocent as he had claimed all along.

(more…)

December 8, 2009

MORE EVIDENCE OF BAD EVIDENCE

Criminal Defense Attorneys Must Request and Analyze Procedures for Testing, Accepted Protocols and Handling of Forensic Evidence

By: Houston Criminal Attorney John T. Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

A criminal defense attorney’s worst nightmare is that the prosecution will rely upon bad evidence to convict his/her client. Defending against relevant, admissible evidence is difficult enough, but there is no real defense against shoddy law enforcement’s collection, processing, and storage of the evidence the prosecution will rely upon in criminal cases. The Houston City Police Department (“HPD”) has a long, sordid history of destroying, botching, and even manufacturing false evidence in criminal cases. The HPD crime lab had to be shut down by the Mayor’s Office in 2002 in the wake of disclosures that lab analysts had mishandled DNA evidence, destroyed evidence, and misrepresented evidence in criminal trials. The fallout from the crime lab scandal still reverberates in our criminal justice system with the exoneration of at least six individuals.

Now the Houston Chronicle informs the public about the results of an adult released in October detailing how HPD’s fingerprint comparison unit mishandled fingerprint evidence in thousands of cases, many involving violent offenders, over the past six years. Taxpayers will now have to subsidize a review of at least 4000 violent crime cases. City Councilwoman Anne Clutterbuck told the Chronicle an amended contract with the firm that conducted the original audit, Ron Smith and Associates, could costs taxpayers between $2 million to $8 million.

This latest “bad evidence” scandal is having its own rippling effect across the political and criminal justice systems in Harris County. Houston Mayor Bill White told the Chronicle he believes criminals went free because of the deliberate mishandling and negligent ineptitude of the fingerprint comparison unit. “I think it’s unacceptable the quality of work the chief and the command staff found in the fingerprint unit,” the Mayor told the newspaper. (more…)

Powered by WordPress © 2010 John T. Floyd III Crimnal Defense Attorney : Webmaster Kevin Grey Lee