Overview
- The court unanimously vacated Daniel Granillo’s 1990 conviction, finding that FBI hair-and-fiber testimony used at trial was later discredited and denied him a fair trial.
- Justice Todd Eddins wrote the majority opinion that applies a state false-evidence rule requiring only a “reasonable possibility” that the bad forensics influenced a juror; two justices concurred with a harsher harmless-error approach.
- Eddins used the opinion to rebuke the Roberts-led U.S. Supreme Court, charging that its recent decisions weaken rights and saying Hawaiʻi’s constitution “takes no instruction” from that jurisprudence.
- The ruling cites scientific reviews and a 2017 Department of Justice finding that FBI hair-and-fiber comparisons cannot reliably identify a unique source and that an FBI expert overstated conclusions.
- Coverage has split sharply along ideological lines, and the decision is likely to prompt broader legal fights over state constitutionalism, appellate error standards for flawed forensics, and requests for new trials in similar cases.