Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSonenshein, David A.
dc.contributor.authorNilon, Robin
dc.date.accessioned2010-12-08T21:36:43Z
dc.date.available2010-12-08T21:36:43Z
dc.date.issued2010
dc.identifier.citation89 Or. L. Rev. 263 (2010)en_US
dc.identifier.issn0196-2043
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1794/10885
dc.description42 p.en_US
dc.description.abstractIt is time to change the law governing lineup eyewitness identification procedures and the admission at trial of eyewitness identifications. Over the last forty years, forensic science has developed considerably while the law governing lineups has remained largely calcified. The advent of DNA typing has underscored the unreliability of lineup identifications. The authors of one study estimate that the convictions of seventy-five percent of those defendants exonerated through the use of DNA evidence were based on erroneous eyewitness testimony. The unreliability of eyewitness identifications is revealed most dramatically in sexual assault cases, which often include both victim identification testimony and physical evidence from which the assailant’s DNA can be determined. DNA evidence has also exonerated many defendants whose convictions for other crimes (some carrying a capital sentence) were based on flawed eyewitness identifications. Improved lineup identification procedures and more stringent admissibility standards can help reduce the number of individuals wrongly convicted through erroneous eyewitness identification.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherUniversity of Oregon Law Schoolen_US
dc.subjectWrongful convictions
dc.subjectJudicial error
dc.subjectEyewitness identification
dc.titleOregon Law Review : Vol. 89, No. 1, p. 263-304 : Eyewitness Errors and Wrongful Convictions: Let’s Give Science a Chanceen_US
dc.title.alternativeEyewitness Errors and Wrongful Convictions: Let’s Give Science a Chanceen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record