The Reliable Application of Fingerprint Evidence

16 Pages Posted: 29 May 2018

Date Written: May 17, 2018

Abstract

In November 2017, a state appellate court did something almost unprecedented: It held that a trial judge made an error by admitting testimony on latent fingerprinting. In State v. McPhaul, the North Carolina appellate panel found error in admitting expert testimony, based on the lack of evidence that the expert reliably reached conclusions about the fingerprint evidence. The panel did not reverse the defendant’s conviction, however, finding the error to be harmless. The ruling has broader significance for as-applied challenges to the forensic testimony commonly used in criminal cases, in which judges have often not carefully examined reliability either for many forensic methods in general, or how they are applied in a given case. Many forensic techniques rely on the subjective judgment of an expert, who may not be able to fully explain how they concluded that a fingerprint, ballistics, or other types of pattern evidence is a “match,” except to cite to their own judgment and experience. In this essay, I describe the scientific status of fingerprint evidence, the facts and the judicial reasoning in McPhaul, and the implications of the decision. This sleeper ruling should awaken interest in the reliable application of forensic methods in individual cases.

Suggested Citation

Garrett, Brandon L., The Reliable Application of Fingerprint Evidence (May 17, 2018). UCLA Law Rev. Disc., Vol. 66, No. 64, 2018. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3180215

Brandon L. Garrett (Contact Author)

Duke University School of Law ( email )

210 Science Drive
Box 90362
Durham, NC 27708
United States
919-613-7090 (Phone)

HOME PAGE: http://www.brandonlgarrett.com/

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
89
Abstract Views
496
rank
292,296
PlumX Metrics