The Conviction Integrity Program of the Suffolk County District Attorney’s office was the first of its kind in the Commonwealth, created to improve upon and continue the critically important task of identifying, correcting, and preventing wrongful convictions.
In 2002, the District Attorney’s DNA Committee was created to examine cases in which newly-available DNA evidence might support a claim of innocence by a convicted defendant. That work soon expanded to include non-DNA cases as well, and over time Suffolk prosecutors filed or joined in motions to vacate nearly a dozen convictions for murder, sexual assault, and other serious offenses.
During that same period, the Suffolk DA’s office implemented a presumptive policy of assenting to any request for post-conviction DNA testing. In 2004, the then-DA established a blue-ribbon task force of prosecutors, defense attorneys, police administrators, and the nation’s leading expert on eyewitness identification to make sweeping reforms to the ways in which that evidence is gathered and used – reforms that Barry Scheck of the Innocence Project said put Boston and Suffolk County “at the forefront of the country.” In 2008, the Boston Bar Association presented the then-DA with its Distinguished Public Servant Award for “steadfast and courageous leadership in reversing wrongful criminal convictions.” In 2015, a member of the DA’s Appellate Division was praised by the chief justice of the Supreme Judicial Court for “acting in the highest tradition of the prosecutive trade” by alerting the court to an issue he discovered that could have resulted in the conviction being overturned.
The historic work of the District Attorney’s DNA Committee and Task Force on Eyewitness Evidence continues today in the Conviction Integrity Program. Members of the program meet at least quarterly and take a two-pronged approach to their task: they examine past convictions in which there is a possibility the defendant is factually innocent, and they study and recommend policies and training to prevent wrongful convictions from occurring in the first place.
When a claim of actual innocence is made – whether by the defendant, family member, or defense attorney – seasoned prosecutors from a variety of disciplines jointly review the entire case. The CIP will also review issues and cases when a trial or appellate prosecutor believes a particular conviction warrants further attention. The CIP assigns an experienced appellate prosecutor and an experienced trial prosecutor to scrutinize the entire case file from the investigative reports to trial transcripts. Following their review, they present all of the facts and evidence to the CIP.
If the underlying case was tried by a current employee of the office, that employee will not take part in the review or presentation in order to avoid any potential bias, conscious or unconscious, in favor if the conviction. If additional investigation is warranted, police detectives are available to gather new evidence, re-interview witnesses, and take further steps if necessary. As with prosecutors, a police detective who worked on the underlying case will not take part in a re-investigation. The convicted defendant’s attorney may also be invited to make a presentation in person to the CIP. If at any stage the evidence reveals that a defendant is factually innocent, the CIP will notify defense counsel and take immediate action to vacate the conviction. If not, the defendant may still argue an appeal or move for a new trial under the existing rules of criminal procedure.
The CIP’s members also research and review best practices for prosecutors and recommend training and changes to policies to ensure these are implemented. This commitment to the highest ethical practices inspired the Suffolk DA’s policy of presumptive discovery, which is much more expansive than required under the traditional Brady standard, and the requirement that all Suffolk prosecutors complete at least 12 hours of continuing legal education per year, which far exceeds any obligation under state law. Certain trainings, such as those on discovery practices, voir dire, and unconscious bias, are mandatory.
Suffolk County is one of the few jurisdictions in the country in which wrongfully imprisoned defendants have not only been exonerated and freed through prosecutors’ efforts, but in some cases have also had the satisfaction of seeing the true offenders identified and convicted. To seek a case review by the Conviction Integrity Program, please contact SUF-CIP@MassMail.State.MA.US.
