ARTICLE TITLE THE IMPACT OF DNA AND OTHER TECHNOLOGY ON THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM: IMPROVEMENTS AND COMPLICATIONS

Background As humans, we seem to have an innate desire to explain the world around us and invent things to change our world. This curiosity has encouraged inventions and technological advances that affect every aspect of our lives. The legal system has been the beneficiary of uncountable technological advances. n1 This article discusses how technological advances such as DNA technology have shaped the criminal and civil justice systems for better and for worse and have generated new legal dilemmas. Part I of this article presents examples of technologies that have affected our lives, such as home computers and the Internet. For example, computers now assist in resolving legal disputes between parties and determining causes of accidents that are the basis of legal cases. Additionally, medical advances have affected our quality and length of life, employer's hiring decisions, and the legal system's ability to establish paternity. Part II discusses the ways in which developments in technology have led to positive outcomes for the criminal justice system. For instance, DNA evidence can exonerate the innocent and confirm that the guilty were brought to justice. Databases of fingerprints and DNA have allowed police to determine if a person in custody for one crime is wanted for another crime, perhaps in another state, resulting in the successful resolution of previously unsolved crimes. Other technologies, such as digital fingerprint scanning, GPS tracking, and digital lineups, are all recent additions to law enforcement's repertoire. Part III presents evidence that suggests that advances in technology also come with costs. Jurors may not understand complicated technological evidence, and may come to expect a great deal of scientific evidence as a result of watching crime shows that portray forensic evidence that definitively proves the defendant's guilt. Crime labs may also make errors, which can lead to wrongful convictions. Part IV discusses the legal dilemmas that new technology has presented. For instance, should a defendant receive a retrial after new technology is developed that could prove his innocence? How long should a death row defendant be allowed to wait to see if technology can be developed to prove his innocence? In 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court considered an appeal in the case of House v. Bell, a case in which new technology with the potential to exonerate the defendant was developed after his conviction. Related issues concern the admissibility of new evidence and whether these new technologies could affect the rights of citizens. Part V speculates about the future of technology in the legal system. As a whole, this article offers an overview of the positive and negative effects of newly developed technology, as well as a summary of the legal dilemmas that accompany such advances. DISCUSSIONS a. Part I. Procedural Discussions

i. Give a brief and concise discussion of the relevant procedures taken/discussed in the article. Only the procedures relevant to legal medicine. b. Part II. Legal Implications i. Give a brief and concise discussion of the legal implications of the issues identified in the article. c. Part III. Legal Arguments/Controversies i. Give an overview of the pros and cons of the parties identified in the article. d. Part IV. Legal Issues Identified i. Identify the legal issues in the article. For example: Whether or not the findings/recommendations/facts arrive at by the author is violative of a statutory or constitutional issue. CONCLUSIONS Technological advances have dramatically affected the court system. Some of these effects have been beneficial, for example, by freeing the innocent and confirming that the correct person was punished. Despite these benefits, technology has also brought about legal dilemmas, such as whether these recent policy changes violate a defendant's privacy and place restrictions on personal freedoms. Another legal dilemma is that such technologies can in fact be erroneous; even established techniques, such as fingerprint matching, have recently met with criticism. There is also concern that juries have begun to place too much reliance on scientific evidence, without considering flaws in the techniques or in crime lab processing. Finally, courts are faced with the dilemma that a person could be put to death, but later technology proves that he or she was innocent. This article has explored both the positives and negatives of these new technologies, how they have changed the legal system for better and for worse, and what kinds of complicated legal questions they produce. As new technologies continue to be utilized in and by the courts, care will need to be taken to see that such advances do not infringe upon defendants' rights. Those who recognize the slippery slope of such technologies, such as DNA databases, need to voice their concerns so that we can ensure their proper, legal usage. Additionally, new technologies discovered post-conviction and which are still in the preliminary stages will further complicate the legal landscape. The courts will have more complicated decisions to make, such as the recent ruling in House v. Bell JURISPRUDENCE/LAWS CITED House vs. Bell Schlup vs. Delo Norman-Bloodsaw v. Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory