Junk Science at Sentencing

62 Pages Posted: 12 Mar 2021

See all articles by Maneka Sinha

Maneka Sinha

University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law

Date Written: March 12, 2021

Abstract

Junk science used in criminal trials has contributed to hundreds of wrongful convictions. But the problem is much worse than that. Junk science does not only harm criminal defendants who go to trial, but also the overwhelming majority of defendants—over ninety-five percent—who plead guilty, skip trial, and proceed straight to sentencing.

Scientific, technical, and other specialized evidence (“STS evidence”) is used regularly, and with increasing frequency, at sentencing. Despite this, Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and its state equivalents—which help filter unreliable STS evidence at trials—do not apply at the critical sentencing stage. In fact, at sentencing, no meaningful admissibility standard guards against junk science deciding punishment. Over ninety-five percent of defendants, therefore, do not get the basic protection against faulty STS evidence that trial defendants get. This may result in harsher sentences based on junk science that has been admitted and considered without any screening or vetting.

This Article offers the first in-depth exploration of STS evidence at sentencing. It links two bodies of literature: the first analyzing the negative effects of junk science on the reliability of trials and the second arguing for extending procedural protections to sentencing. This Article builds upon these literatures by proposing an implementable mechanism for evaluating STS evidence at sentencing while retaining special protections for criminal defendants. The Article recommends that Federal Rule of Evidence 702 (or its state analog) apply at sentencing to determine the admissibility of STS evidence offered in support of harsher punishment, but not to such evidence offered by defendants as mitigation.

Keywords: junk science, federal rules of evidence, FRE 702, scientific evidence, admissibility

Suggested Citation

Sinha, Maneka, Junk Science at Sentencing (March 12, 2021). George Washington Law Review, Vol. 89, No. 1, 2021, U of Maryland Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2021-03, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3803527

Maneka Sinha (Contact Author)

University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law ( email )

500 West Baltimore Street
Baltimore, MD 21201-1786
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
53
Abstract Views
207
rank
443,287
PlumX Metrics