Renewed War on Drugs, harsher charging policies, stepped-up criminalization of immigrants — in the current climate, joining the NACDL is more important than ever. Members of NACDL help to support the only national organization working at all levels of government to ensure that the voice of the defense bar is heard.
Take a stand for a fair, rational, and humane criminal justice system
Contact members of congress, sign petitions, and more
Help us continue our fight by donating to NFCJ
Help shape the future of the association
Join the dedicated and passionate team at NACDL
Increase brand exposure while building trust and credibility
NACDL is committed to enhancing the capacity of the criminal defense bar to safeguard fundamental constitutional rights.
NACDL harnesses the unique perspectives of NACDL members to advocate for policy and practice improvements in the criminal justice system.
NACDL envisions a society where all individuals receive fair, rational, and humane treatment within the criminal justice system.
NACDL’s mission is to serve as a leader, alongside diverse coalitions, in identifying and reforming flaws and inequities in the criminal justice system, and redressing systemic racism, and ensuring that its members and others in the criminal defense bar are fully equipped to serve all accused persons at the highest level.
Showing 1 - 15 of 335 results
"Making Sense of Science XIII" LOCATION: Four Seasons Hotel, Las Vegas, NV DATES: April 22-24, 2021
Law enforcement has started to use genetic genealogy websites to try to identify suspects in cold cases. How does genetic genealogy work? What should defense attorneys look for if forensic genetic genealogy is used in their cases?
Federal laws protecting individual privacy rights in electronic communications have not been meaningfully updated in over 25 years, even though many of today’s technologies were not even conceived of when Congress considered the legislation and when the Supreme Court created the “Third Party Doctrine.” This white paper discusses the current status of the law and concludes with recommendations for reform. [Released February 2012]
No Longer the Gold Standard: Probabilistic Genotyping is Changing the Nature of DNA Evidence in Criminal Trials, 24 Berkeley J. Crim. L. 110 (2019). By Bess Stiffelman. Academic journal article in Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law. Defense perspective on DNA and Probabilistic Genotyping. Argument that it is inconsistent with the presumption of innocence
This is a brief response to the critique of Bess Stiffelman's previous article, No Longer the Gold Standard: Probabilistic Genotyping is Changing the Nature of DNA Evidence in Criminal Trials, 24 Berkeley J. Crim. L. 110 (2019). The critique of her article was published earlier this year in this journal. I address both criticisms and misunderstandings of her arguments in an effort to frame the concerns of the criminal defense community about the impact of probabilistic genotyping on the deliberative process.
Smartphones can create a detailed record of what their users have been doing. Wisconsin litigator Peyton Engel focuses on the traits smartphones have in common with general-purpose computers and the implications from a digital evidentiary perspective. He discusses retrieving evidence from smartphones, extracting information from cloud storage, finding evidence of a secret or hidden phone, wearable tech, issuing subpoenas for social media records, and using apps to collect evidence.
A Report by NACDL’s Fourth Amendment Advocacy Committee Reporter, Steven R. Morrison [Released July 2014]
The Fourth Amendment has entered the digital age. New surveillance technologies and programs — from GPS tracking devices to automated license plate readers to bulk data collection — have upended traditional law enforcement practices and created new challenges for defense lawyers. This report offers an overview of this symposium and the substantive areas of concern related to new technological and legal changes that impact Fourth Amendment protections in criminal cases. [Released June 2016]
Forensic science evidence presented in court is often based on speculative research, subjective interpretations and inadequate quality control procedures, according to this report. Police need to be taken out of the laboratory, and the "crime labs" need to be taken out of the police station, with the goal of ensuring the scientific integrity of forensic science evidence. Neutrality and objectivity are as essential to preventing wrongful convictions and exonerating the innocent as they are to solving crimes and convicting the guilty. [Released February 2010]
This month Matthew T. Mangino reviews The Cadaver King and the Country Dentist: A True Story of Injustice in the American South by Radley Balko and Tucker Carrington.
The broad issue here is differential diagnosis v. differential etiology. Basically, doctors should not testify as to how an injury occurred. Their expertise is limited to and so should their testimony be limited to diagnosing the injury. The opinion is very well written and provides a pretty good road map of how the lawyers attached the testimony. It has broad implications. Both the opinion and the filings are attached.
“Surreptitious DNA sample” refers to the collection and analysis of DNA from a person without the person’s knowledge and without coercion. For example, the police may swab a suspect’s DNA from a discarded cigarette. Oded Oren outlines an argument for suppressing the DNA information extracted from the analysis of surreptitiously obtained DNA rather than suppression of the DNA itself or the physical object from which it was obtained.
Pregnant Women, Junk Science, and Zealous Defense
In recent years, the government has increasingly turned to hacking as an investigative technique. Specifically, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) has begun deploying malware: software designed to infiltrate and control, disable, or surveil a computer’s use and activity.
