Prosecutors to Prosecutors: Implement a Conviction Integrity Program

“Prosecutors can and should be leading the charge to ensure that the public has confidence that criminal convictions are of the guilty, not the innocent.” This truism comes from a new report, “Establishing Conviction Integrity Programs in Prosecutors’ Office” that is notable not only because it offers a blueprint to improve every prosecutorial office in the country, but also because most making the recommendations are former or current prosecutors themselves.

A product of NYU Law’s Center on the Administration of Criminal Law (the Conviction Integrity Project), the report (here) provides a template for reforms that prosecutors can implement cost effectively even in smaller offices.

Proven wrongful convictions have revealed troubling prosecutorial missteps—misconduct, defensiveness and denial, obstruction of efforts to re-investigate or do DNA post-conviction testing, resistance to best practices, opposition to reforms—that challenge public confidence in the wake of 300 Innocence Project DNA-proven exonerations and 973 exonerations documented in The National Registry of Exonerations.

In contrast, this report offers a laudable response from and for prosecutors committed to improving the system.

The first step to laying the groundwork for reform: The establishment of an office culture that rewards those who demonstrate a commitment to seeking the truth, not just getting convictions. The report notes that advancement for line prosecutors should not rely on a win-loss record but on the quality of work in all cases “regardless of whether they win, lose, or move for post-conviction vacation of a charge.”

The report stresses the role of executive leadership in rewarding, training, creating checklists, implementing discovery initiatives (such as “open file” discovery or a uniform definition of Brady requirements), and establishing procedures for re-investigating legitimate post-conviction claims of innocence.

Prosecutors are encouraged to work with law enforcement to implement procedural reforms in the investigative phase, in training, and in implementing recommended reforms such as videotaping of custodial interrogations and double-blind administration of sequential lineups and photo displays.

Creation of evidence retention and post-conviction testing policies should be developed with forensic labs.

The report—which summarizes its blueprint in a “Top Ten” list of conviction integrity best practices—should be recommended reading for every district attorney in the country.

Professionals in our criminal justice system have exhibited different responses to the unacceptable error of wrongful conviction. One response—to deny the significance and scope of the problem and defend the status quo—will be challenged more and more as the public increasingly understands that we can do better. The other response—as exemplified by the participants in this report—is to encourage an office culture that rewards quality performance, creates and implements best practices, works cooperatively to drive reforms with professional colleagues, and elevates accuracy, fairness, and finding truth above just getting convictions.

The Conviction Integrity Project’s report also emphasizes the importance of prosecutors’ speaking out about reform efforts: “…the failure to report on prosecutors’ reform efforts has had the unintended consequence of making it look like prosecutors are sitting on their hands, waiting for the defense bar to uncover wrongful convictions…publicizing these efforts sends an important message to the public—including potential witnesses, jurors, and voters—that a DA’s office is committed to proactively improving the criminal justice system to ensure the process is truly fair.”

This is an exciting and encouraging report on many levels. Please share it with your local prosecutor.