CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

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

October 2, 2009

THE JUNK SCIENCE OF DOG SCENT LINEUPS

Popular Law Enforcement Dog Handler Discredited After False Results, Exaggerated Claims of Accuracy Exposed

By: Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

We have blogged (False Forensics: An Attorney’s Worst Nightmare, May 1, 2009) in the past about the dangers of “false forensic” evidence being used in courtrooms to convict innocent people. The New York-based Innocence Project reported in 2007 that 65% of the nation’s first 200 DNA exonerations in this country involved fraudulent, unreliable or limited forensic science. Wrongful convictions based on false forensics—or what is commonly referred to as “junk science”—in the State of Texas occur with the same or at a greater frequency.

And what is “junk science?”

In an September 21, 2009 special report titled “Dog Scent Lineups: A Junk Science Injustice,” the Texas Innocence Project (TIP) provided the following illustrative definition: “Even before the television show ‘CSI’ became popular, juries and judges have tended to believe what ‘scientific experts’ say in criminal cases—especially if these ‘experts’ are police officers or prosecution witnesses. One study found that ‘about one quarter of jurors who were presented with scientific evidence believed that had such evidence been absent, they would have changed their verdicts—from guilty to not guilty.’ In the hands of a skilled prosecutor, scientific-sounding testimony from any source, no matter how fraudulent, can be played to great dramatic effect and win convictions.

“Prosecutors have taken full advantage of the gullibility of jurors and the willingness of courts to allow the use of these techniques. In case after case, prosecutors have used phony ‘experts’ with little or no training or education, false results from shoddy labs and dubious ‘theories’ with no basis in fact to get convictions. Taken together, these abusive practices have come to be known as the use of ‘junk science.’ The use of this ‘evidence’ is not limited to the courtroom: law enforcement agencies have come more and more to rely on it in making arrests and getting indictments.”

There is no greater “junk science” than “dog scent lineups” and the phoniest “expert” involved in this particular junk science is a Fort Bend County deputy sheriff named Keith Pikett. A native of New York, Pikett served six years in the Navy after he graduated from high school before taking a job at a ship yard in the early 1970s in Mobile, Alabama, according to TIP. He then graduated from the University of South Alabama with a chemistry degree and in 1984 received a master’s degree in “Sport Science” at an Alabama institution called United States Sports Academy. (more…)

August 12, 2009

SIXTH INNOCENT HARRIS COUNTY MAN FREED

Hall of Shame: Texas Leads Nation in DNA Exonerations

By: Houston Criminal Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

That the Houston City Police Department’s Crime Lab was a lawless, rogue unit serving the “convict at any costs” philosophy of the Harris County District Attorney’s Office during the Johnny Holmes and Charles “Chuck” Rosenthal administrations, between 1980 and 2005, is no longer a subject of serious debate. Dozens, possibly hundreds, of innocent people—mostly poor minorities charged with homicides or sex crimes—were railroaded off to Texas prisons based on fabricated (or at best faulty) forensic evidence supplied by the Crime Lab and/or due to mistaken identification secured to corrupt pretrial photo lineup procedures.

On June 13, 2007, former U.S. Justice Department Inspector Michael Bromwich issued a 400-page report that concluded the crime lab’s DNA and serology departments had made hundreds of “serious and pervasive” mistakes in homicide and sexual assault cases. Bromwich two-year investigation examined more than 3500 cases processed by the crime lab over the previous quarter century. 135 of those were DNA cases handled by the crime lab between 1992 and 2002, Bromwich’s investigators found “major issues” in 43 of those cases, and, even more disturbing, found “major issues” in 4 of the 18 death penalty cases it examined.

Before Bromwich initiated his investigation, and following a 2002 “audit” of the crime lab ordered by city officials, two Harris County criminal defendants were ordered released by local courts after it was determined that the crime lab’s false forensic evidence had resulted in their wrongful rape convictions. George Rodriquez was released in 2004 after serving 17 years in the Texas prison system for kidnapping and rape. A Harris County federal jury awarded him $5 million this past June based on the city’s “deliberate indifference” to the recurring problems at the crime lab. In 2003 Josiah Sutton was released after serving 4 ½ years for a rape conviction after DNA tests discredited forensic tests performed by the crime lab. The following year Gov. Rick Perry granted a “full pardon” to Sutton.

Since the June 2007 release of the Bromwich report, four additional Harris County criminal defendants have been ordered released by local courts after it was determined they had been wrongfully convicted of sex offenses. The first was Ronald Gene Taylor who was released in October 2007 after serving 14 years for a rape conviction. DNA evidence—semen on the rape victim’s bed sheet which had not been tested by the crime lab—revealed that the semen belonged to another man who had a history of violent sexual assaults. (more…)

July 6, 2009

SHOULD EVIDENCE OF PRIOR FALSE ABUSE ALLEGATIONS BE ADMISSIBLE IN SEXUAL ASSAULT CASES?

Inadmissible Evidence under 608(b) of the Texas Rules of Evidence May be Admissible under 613(b), Rule 412 or Confrontation Clause

By: Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

A Harris County federal jury recently awarded $5 million to George Rodriquez for the 17 years he spent in the Texas prison system after being wrongfully convicted of the rape of a 14-year-old girl. And a Harris County district court judge last December ordered Ricardo Rachell released after he spent six years in the Texas prison system after being wrongfully convicted of sexually molesting an eight-year-old boy.

These two cases are just a series of wrongful convictions in sex offense cases that have been uncovered in Harris County and throughout the State of Texas. It is easier to wrongfully convict a person of a sex offense than any other crime. There are few crimes that carry such a heinous social stigma. Just the mention of a child sex crime often creates a presumption of guilt (Just look to Michael Jackson). It is one of the few crimes that require only the word of the alleged victim to establish the guilt of the person accused. These are generally “she said/he said” kinds of facts scenarios. Just last year, this Firm successfully defended, at two separate trials, a corrections officer who had been charged with child sex crimes based solely on the word of the female inmates. Although our client was acquitted of the false rape accusations, he and his family were put through an ordeal of financial sacrifice, shame and embarrassment, and the loss of his career in law enforcement.

Beyond intentionally submitted false forensic evidence and mistaken identification, why is it so easy to wrongfully convict defendants charged in sex offense cases? The primary reason is that the evidentiary rules of evidence are stacked against the defendant in favor of protecting the alleged victim from further emotional “trauma” associated with sexual assault. For example, in Texas, a defendant does not have a per se right to impeach a sexual assault victim about prior false sexual assault allegations made by the victim.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (“CCA”) made this abundantly clear in 2000 in the case of Rudolfo Lopez. 1/ Lopez was convicted of sexually assaulting a 12-year-old boy (forcing the boy to perform oral sex on him over a period of several months) and sentenced to twelve years in prison. At his trial Lopez had sought to introduce evidence that two years earlier the boy had made a false allegation of physical abuse against his mother; namely, that his mother had thrown him against a washing machine. Lopez sought to use this false allegation the boy had made to the Department of Human Services, but the trial court refused to allow the evidence under Rule 608(b) of the Texas Rules of Evidence. Although a state appeals court would later rule that the evidence should have been admitted, the CCA reversed the appeals court ruling and upheld the trial court decision not to admit the false allegation evidence. 2/ (more…)

June 30, 2009

THE DNA FALLOUT CONTINUES

District Attorney’s Office of the Third Judicial District v. Osborne; U.S. Supreme Court Blocks Ability for Wrongfully Convicted to Prove Innocence

By: Houston Criminal Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

George Rodriquez spent 17 years in the Texas prison system for a crime he did not commit. He was 26 years of age in 1987 when he was wrongfully convicted by a Harris County jury for the rape of a 14-year-old girl. The jury based its decision on a critical piece of forensic evidence; a pubic hair found in the victim’s underwear. A serologist with the Houston City Police Department’s Crime Lab determined that the pubic hair did not belong to another suspect in the rape case, Isidro Yanez. The serologist testified at Rodriquez’s trial, saying that while his forensic testing ruled out Yanez, it did not rule out Rodriquez.

Seventeen years later DNA testing established that the pubic hair in fact belonged to Yanez and not to Rodriquez. Rodriquez was released from prison in 2004. The Harris County District Attorney’s office refused to declare Rodriquez “actually innocent” of the crime. That official refusal to acknowledge his innocence precluded him from receiving a pardon and being awarded state compensation for his wrongful confinement. He filed a federal civil rights suit against the City of Houston and a federal court jury on June 25, 2009 awarded him $5 million dollars in damages for the 17-year wrongful imprisonment.

The Rodriquez case has not been the only Texas DNA case is the news lately. Two men convicted in the infamous 1991 Austin “yogurt shop” murder case were recently released on bond from jail. The convictions of the two men, Michael Scott and Robert Springsteen, were reversed several months ago on appeal after DNA tests on the state’s evidence indicated the presence of an unknown suspect. Attorneys for the two men say the presence of DNA evidence of the unknown suspect exonerates their clients. Prosecutors do not agree. They believe the new evidence only indicates that yet another person was involved in the crime; therefore, prosecutors plan to continue their prosecution of Springsteen and Scott for the murders of the four teenage girls killed during the robbery of the Austin yogurt shop.

These two Texas cases illustrate the potentially devastating impact of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in an Alaska case that held state prisoners do not enjoy a constitutional right to post-conviction access to the State’s evidence for DNA testing. 1/ (more…)

May 2, 2009

FALSE FORENSICS: AN ATTORNEY’S WORST NIGHTMARE, INJUSTICE TO US ALL

Gary Alvin Richard; Wrongly Convicted Man Released after 22 Years

By: Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

They are called “experts.” Prosecutors parade them into court dressed in respectful suit ware and carry resumes packed with a laundry list of degrees. They then testify about the science of “forensic evidence” in ways that more often confuse rather than clarify the issues being tried in a criminal case. Worst yet, many of these “CSI” experts testify falsely, or in misleading fashion, about test results they either did not perform correctly or whose results they manufactured to fit a given prosecutorial objective. Incompetent or unethical “forensic experts” are a criminal defense attorney’s worst nightmare.

The Houston Chronicle (April 25, 2009) carried a report about yet another Harris County case where an potentially innocent person spent 22 years in prison for a rape and robbery he did not commit because of false testimony and faulty “forensic evidence” from the now thoroughly discredited Houston Police Department’s (HPD) crime lab. The case involves Gary Alvin Richard who was released after 22 years in prison on his personal recognizance. Mr. Richard was convicted by a jury in connection with a 1987 attack on a nursing student who was abducted from a local Laundromat, robbed, and taken to an abandoned apartment where she was repeatedly raped.

During a seven-month period after the attack, the victim called the police twice to report that she had seen the man who assaulted her. The HPD did not respond to these calls. Seven months after the attack the victim called the police department a third time to report that she had just seen her attacker in a store. This time the police responded to the call and arrested Richard. Although Richard had a minor criminal history involving petty drug use, there was no violence in his record.

The victim’s mistaken identification of Richard was supported by forensic evidence developed by the HPD crime lab. New tests conducted on that same evidence on April 24 revealed that the crime lab analyst not only lied to the jury but withheld evidence that was exculpatory to Richard. (more…)

April 16, 2009

THE CONTINUING SAGA OF THE WRONGFULLY CONVICTED

Factors Contributing to Wrongful Convictions and Unjust Imprisonment

By: Houston Criminal Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

In a March 16, 2009 article (“Cold Shoulder from Lubbock Officials in Cole Case”), we wrote extensively about the tragic wrongful conviction of Timothy Cole. A military veteran and college student, this son of a school teacher and Bell Helicopter manager was convicted in 1986 for the December 1985 rape of a Texas Tech student in Lubbock, Texas. Despite vigorous protestations of innocence from Cole and his family, Cole was convicted and sentenced to 25 years in prison where he died fourteen years later.

In February, state district judge Charles Baird indicated from the bench that Cole had been wrongfully convicted after DNA evidence established his innocence and pointed the finger of guilt at another convicted rapist already housed in the Texas prison system for several other Lubbock rapes. On April 7, 2009, Judge Baird made his February finding official and formally ruled that Cole had been wrongfully convicted. That ruling made Timothy Cole the first person in Texas history to be exonerated posthumously by DNA evidence.

Cole’s family recently met with Texas Gov. Rick Perry to request a posthumous pardon. All indications are that the governor will honor the request.

“When we started this back on September 26, 1986, when Tim was convicted, we knew this would not be a sprint race,” Cory Session, Timothy’s brother, recently told AP writer Jeff Carlton. “It was going to be a marathon. Here we are a quarter of a century later.” (more…)

March 16, 2009

COLD SHOULDER FROM LUBBOCK OFFICIALS IN COLE CASE

DNA Exonerations: Improper Eyewitness Identification Procedures and Poor Police Work; A Deadly Combination

By: Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

Dying in prison is a sad, tragic affair. Timothy Cole died in a Texas prison in 1999 from asthma complications. He was 39 years of age. The prison’s health care officials notified the security staff of the inmate’s death. In all likelihood, a prison guard escorted an inmate orderly to Cole’s “bunk” where his blanket and sheets were stripped from a thin plastic-covered mattress. The guard used a master key to open a commissary-purchased combination lock on a foot locker that contained Cole’s “personal belongings.” The orderly sorted through the items to separate “state-issued” property from Cole’s personal belongings (letters, legal files, photos, etc.). The state and personal items were placed in separate plastic trash bags. The meager items in those trash bags represented the sum total of a man’s life in prison.

Timothy Cole was twenty-six years old in April 1985. He was a student attending Texas Tech University in Lubbock. It was a difficult time for both the city and the university community. A serial rapist had sexually assaulted five women dating back to December 1984. The police had developed a profile of the rapist: African-American, chain smoker (Winstons being his brand of choice), wore a terry cloth shirt and jeans (and sometimes tong sandals), approached women alone as they exited their vehicles, armed with a small pocket knife during the attacks, drove the women to remote areas where he raped them in their vehicles, talked incessantly about racism at Texas Tech University, stole their money and jewelry, and fled the attack scenes on foot.

The fifth woman raped was Michele Mallin. It was March 25, 1985. The 20-year-old Tech student had pulled her ’79 Cutlass Supreme into the eastern edge of a Methodist church parking lot located across the street from the university campus. She parked there because she didn’t have a student parking pass. It was 10:00 p.m. The night temperature had turned cool. But she was comfortable in her sweat suit as she prepared to get out of her car. She was approached by an African American man wearing a yellow terry cloth shirt, jeans, and tong sandals. The medium built man had short curly hair and bulging eyes. His demeanor and appearance did not arouse any suspicion in Mallin. He asked her something about some jumper cables. She pointed to the taillights of another car, suggesting they might be able to help him.

The black man did not say anything. He stood there watching as the other vehicle pulled out of the parking lot. He then turned quickly to Mallin’s car door and yanked it open. He jumped into the vehicle, pushing the student into the passenger seat. She recovered immediately, pulling at the attacker’s curly hair and biting deep into his thumb. He cursed and pulled a knife as Mallin continued to kick at him. He grabbed her into a headlock and threatened to kill her with the knife. It was at that point when Mallin realized the attacker had a knife. She ceased resisting. The attacker drove her car slowly out of the church parking lot and headed for the outskirts of Lubbock where there were no city lights. (more…)

Powered by WordPress © 2009 John T. Floyd III All Rights Reserved:Webmaster Kevin Grey Lee