Brief filed: 09/26/2022
New Jersey v. Arteaga
Superior Court of New Jersey; Case No. A-3078-21T1
In this case of first impression, appellant argues that information about the technology and procedures underlying a facial recognition search must be disclosed to the defendant to cure the risk of misidentification and in accordance with Brady v. Maryland, even if the result of the search was used only investigatively, subject to later corroboration, and not admitted into evidence. The amicus brief explains the numerous opportunities for error present in the facial recognition process, and how error in that process determines the course of the investigation and results in racially disparate and otherwise wrongful arrests. NACDL’s Fourth Amendment Center has been working to better understand how defendants’ due process rights are impacted by the growing use of facial recognition technology and to equip defense attorneys with the knowledge and tools to combat resulting Brady violations.
Clare Garvie and Alan Silber, NACDL; Christopher Frascella and Jacob Wiener, Electronic Privacy Information Center; Jennifer Lynch and Hannah Zhao, Electronic Frontier Foundation.