Supreme Court endorses use of new technology

In a 5-to-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that DNA evidence that sheds doubt on a defendant’s guilt can be used to reopen the case in federal court.

The decision was the proper one.

At issue was the case of a paroled rapist who was found guilty 20 years ago of murdering a woman. But 10 years after his conviction, DNA testing proved that the semen prosecutors had used to support speculation the woman had been raped actually was her husband’s.

The Supreme Court ruled that the new evidence raised sufficient doubt about who committed the crime to merit a new hearing in federal court.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority, emphasized that the court’s decision did not exonerate the man. But the court must take into account all evidence, “old and new, incriminating and exculpatory,” when an inmate comes to federal court with evidence of innocence.

DNA evidence has proved to be highly valuable in determining the guilt or innocence of people throughout the nation.

Since 1992, about 200 prisoners nationwide, several of them on death row, have been exonerated by DNA evidence through the Innocence Project.

DNA testing is not a miracle fix, but along with circumstantial evidence, eyewitness accounts and other physical evidence, genetic analysis can decrease the chances of wrongful exonerations or convictions.

The court did not make new law in its decision. But it did take a much-needed step forward in making it clear how lower courts should handle new technology in allowing appeals.