summarizing a relevant court case (20 pts). The first part of this assignment will require you to locate and briefly summarize a criminal court case in which biological evidence was used in court to demonstrate a defendant's criminal responsibility (or lack thereof). In 200-500 words, you will (1) identify the court case you are focusing on, (2) summarize how the biological evidence in your case was used in court, and (3) describe how the evidence changed (or did not change) the outcome of the court case. I recommend using Google Scholar and Westlaw to locate court cases. Relevant uses of biological evidence could include evaluating a defendant's competency to stand trial or be executed, establishing eligibility for the insanity defense, or determining the type of length of sentencing after a trial has concluded. Biological evidence from the investigation phase (e.g., DNA, fingerprints, etc.) is not appropriate for this assignment. The paper will be graded using the following rubric (points):

this paper is based on the case: TERRY J. HARRINGTON, Appellant, vs. STATE OF IOWA, Appellee 2003

use this as a reference

1. Case Summary: Terry Harrington was found guilty of first-degree murder in 1978 and went to jail for more than twenty years until new proof came to light. Brain fingerprinting is a neuroscientific method that his lawyers used in an appeal to support his claim that he was wrongfully convicted. Electroencephalography (EEG) picks up the brain's P300 reaction, a type of brainwave that lets others know that a person is known when introduced to everyday events. This way of testing tries to find out if the suspect can remember specific details about a crime. The court case was primarily about using this method to show that Harrington did not know much about the crime, which would mean he was responsible. 2. Use of Biological Evidence: Brain fingerprinting was used to show scientific proof that Harrington's first judgment was wrong. The defense said Harrington was not guilty because he did not have a P300 response to crime-related facts, which means he could not see important details that only a real criminal would know. This proof was given to show that his brain did not know about the crime, which backed his claim that he was innocent. 3. Impact on Case Outcome: Though the discovery of brain fingerprinting did not fully clear Harrington, it made people question whether his verdict was proper. There were many problems with the last trial that came up with this case, such as unreliable eyewitness statements and possibly hidden proof. Ultimately, this led to a more thorough review of the case and Harrington's release. Ultimately, his sentence was overturned in 2003, partly because brain fingerprinting brought attention to the case. However, the court did not directly recognize the technology as proof of innocence.

make sure you write full paragraphs

• Paper is approximately 6-10 pages (including cover page and references)
• Facts of the case (5)
  • What happened in your court case?
  • You can use your Court Case Summary (Part 1) as a starting point
• Biological Evidence (10)
  • What biological evidence are you focusing on?
  • Explain how the biological evidence in this case was used
  • briefly explain why the biological evidence matters in this case
  • How is the biological evidence related to the defendant's criminal responsibility?
  • As above, you can use your Court Case Summary (Part 1) as a starting point
• Support of Daubert standard (5)
  • Did the evidence meet the Daubert Standard criteria for admissibility?
  • Why or why not?
• Prosecution and Defense's Perspectives on Biological Evidence (5)
  • Did it help or hurt the prosecution's case?
  • Did it help or hurt the defense's case?
  • Did the prosecution provide an expert witness to testify about the biological evidence?
  • Did the defense provide an expert witness to testify about the biological evidence?
  • Did the prosecution cross-examine (critique) the defense's perspective?
  • Did the defense cross-examine (critique) the prosecution's perspective?
• Court Decision (5)
  • Overall decision (e.g., verdict, sentencing, appeal decision, etc.)
  • Decision regarding biological evidence (admitted vs. not admitted)
• Analysis of Scientific Validity (30)
  • The purpose of the analysis section in your paper is to evaluate the scientific validity of the biological evidence in your court case using up-to-date, scientific research. This should be the main focus of your final paper.
  • Important Note: I do not want you to write about your personal opinion regarding the biological evidence. Instead, you must write about the evidence from a neutral, evidence-based perspective.
    • Remember that the scientific evidence could be for OR against the validity of the biological evidence. It is not your job to defend or argue against the evidence in this paper; just report the scientific community's current perspective(s) on the evidence. If some science supports the evidence and other science does not, report and explain both perspectives!
    • Try to put yourself in the shoes of an expert witness who has been asked to testify about the validity of the evidence in a court of law!
    • Even if you personally dislike the defendant and/or disagree with the court's ruling, remember that it is our professional responsibility to maintain a neutral evidence-based perspective!
  • You must reference material covered during lecture in your analysis. To cite lecture material, you can use the following citation and reference:
    • In-text citation: (Ditchfield, 202X)
    • Reference: Ditchfield, R. E. (202X). Lecture title [PowerPoint Slides].
    • Your integration of material from lecture will be worth up to 10 pts in this section.
  • You must use at least 6 peer-reviewed scientific journal articles cited (textbook chapters, law journal articles, blogs, and news articles do not count!)
    • • -2 points per missing journal article
      • Relevant scientific fields that you might cite include psychology, neuroscience, biology, and medicine.
      • Cited articles should clarify or expand on the validity of selected biological evidence in a meaningful and thoughtful way. Using a peer-reviewed journal article to merely provide the definition for a type of biological evidence is not a meaningful contribution to a discussion about the validity of the evidence.
      • Your analysis should make it clear that you understand the findings and contribution of your cited articles and how these articles connect to the biological evidence in your case.
  • At least one of your peer-reviewed journal articles must be a meta-analysis. It does not need to be a meta-analysis of the specific biological evidence you are reviewing, but it should be closely related to the biological evidence's impact on your court case (e.g., you might cite a meta-analysis covering the impacts of intellectual disability if your evidence is traumatic brain injury in a death-penalty eligibility case).
    • -5 pts if meta-analysis is not included in analysis
  • Your analysis should smoothly integrate paraphrased cited research within your writing. This means that your takeaways from cited research articles must be written in your own words.
    • Use of quotations or direct quotes in your analysis will result in a 10 pt penalty.
  • The final portion of your analysis should include a brief discussion of whether (or not) court made the correct decision based on updated, modern scientific evidence
    • Just because the court concluded the evidence was not scientific 20 years ago does not mean the court would make the same decision today!
  • Above all, all parts of your analysis must be backed up with evidence & citations from peer-reviewed sources.
• Conclusion (5)
  • Brief paragraph (~100-150 words) succinctly summarizing the role of biological evidence in your court case