Document Type
Article
Publication Date
1-1-2008
Abstract
Under the law of lost evidence, absent a showing of bad faith, no due process violation occurs when the police lose potentially exculpatory evidence. This is so even though the evidence may be critical to the defense and even though post-conviction DNA testing has exonerated more than 200 individuals. Ironically, the case that developed that rule of law, Arizona v. Youngblood, is founded on the conviction of an innocent man. This Article critically examines Youngblood and provides a conceptual framework for examining the constitutional right of access to evidence. Supreme Court precedent reflects two different, sometimes competing, visions of procedural due process: adjudicative fairness to the accused or an instrumental focus on deterring official misconduct. In Youngblood, instrumentalism trumped adjudicative fairness. Moreover, four compelling developments in the twenty-one years since Youngblood was decided--scientific advances, legislative reform, state judicial disapproval, and doctrinal incoherence--have eroded its rationale and legitimacy.
Publication Title
Washington University Law Review
Volume
86
First Page
241
Recommended Citation
Norman C. Bay,
Old Blood, Bad Blood, and YoungBlood: Due Process, Lost Evidence, and the Limits of Bad Faith,
86
Washington University Law Review
241
(2008).
Available at:
https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/law_facultyscholarship/249
