Overview
- The court unanimously vacated Daniel Granillo’s 1990 conviction for sexual assault and ordered a new trial after finding the FBI hair-and-fiber testimony at his trial was false or unreliable.
- Justice Todd Eddins wrote the majority opinion applying a false-evidence fairness test that treats prosecutor knowledge as irrelevant and requires only a reasonable possibility that the discredited evidence swayed a juror.
- Two justices wrote separate concurring opinions arguing for a harmless-error standard that would force the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the flawed testimony did not affect the verdict.
- Scientific reviews by the National Academy of Sciences and a federal panel, and a 2017 DOJ notice that an FBI expert overstated the method’s reach, underlie the court’s finding that hair-and-fiber comparisons cannot reliably identify a unique source.
- Eddins used the opinion to openly rebuke recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions on issues such as Dobbs and Voting Rights, and the ruling could prompt more state-level challenges to convictions based on discredited forensic methods and lead to wider review of past cases.