District Attorney’s Office for the Third Judicial District, et al. v. Osborne
Issue: Whether a defendant may access a stateâ€™s biological evidence following a conviction under 42 U.S.C. 1983 or the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts on June 18, 2009.
Briefs and Documents
- Brief for the City of New York in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the States of California, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming, in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the the United States of America in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the Council of State Governments, the National Association of Counties, and the International Municipal Lawyers Association in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for K.G. and the National Crime Victim Law Institute in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for 11 Individuals Who Have Received Clemancy Through DNA Testing in Support of Respondent
- Brief for Individuals Exonerated By Post-Conviction DNA Testing in Support of Respondent
- Brief for Current and Former Prosecutors in Support of Respondent
- Brief for Jeanette Popp, Jennifer Thompson-Cannino, Melinda Elkins, Tracy Kanellopoulos, Stacy Fierge, Michele Mallin, and Mark Tokarski in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the American Civil Liberties Union, Rutherford Institute, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Respondent