Appellate Judges Education Institute

Breakout 8: Cutting Edge Scientific Knowledge or Junk Science?

Description: What constitutes accepted scientific evidence in courtrooms today? Many previously admissible types of scientific evidence have since been discredited, while new types of scientific evidence have been created and deemed admissible. This panel will explore both established scientific evidence and emerging schools of scientific evidence. It will also discuss admissibility and the role of expert witnesses.

Learning Objectives: After attendance, attendees will understand how to apply the standards set out in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), with regard to expert witnesses and scientific evidence. The panel will explain how scientific evidence is used in both criminal and civil contexts. Older, discredited scientific evidence (junk science) will be identified and discussed, as well as, current and emerging scientific evidence. This discussion will include DNA evidence and FIGG (Forensic Investigative Genetic Genealogy). In addition, the discussion will include practical tips for the admissibility of scientific evidence and the proper role of expert witnesses.

After attendance, attendees will be better positioned to:

Understand how to apply the standards set out in Daubert v. Merrell Down Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
Apply the Daubert standards to expert witnesses and scientific evidence
Evaluate scientific evidence in both criminal and civil contexts
Recognize and identify out-of-date, discredited scientific evidence (junk science)
Differentiate between (1) older, discredited scientific evidence and (2) current and emerging scientific evidence
Understand how to apply DNA and FIGG (Forensic Investigative Genetic Genealogy) evidence to their cases
Achieve favorable results regarding the admissibility of scientific evidence
Understand the proper role expert witnesses play in cases and trials

Can you tell the difference between cutting-edge forensics and junk science? Our expert panel will demystify and critically evaluate the scientific underpinnings of novel forensic evidence and delve into the legal framework for its admissibility and challenges, offering insights from both the lab and the courtroom.

Jessica Gabel Cino, Krevolin & Horst

Jessica Gabel Cino is a partner at Krevolin & Horst, where she focuses on complex litigation and white-collar defense. She brings a wealth of experience in forensic science, the application of Daubert standards, and the use of scientific evidence in both civil and criminal cases.

Before re-entering private practice, Cino was a tenured law professor at Georgia State University College of Law, where she taught courses on forensic evidence, evidence, contracts, and bankruptcy. She served as the faculty advisor to the mock trial and student advocacy programs. With a background in forensic science, she has spent much of her career educating legal professionals on the rigorous application of scientific evidence in legal proceedings.

Her scholarly work explores the intersection of science and legal standards. In An Uncivil Action: Criminalizing Daubert in Procedure and Practice to Avoid Wrongful Convictions, she advocated for a rigorous application of Daubert standards in criminal cases to prevent wrongful convictions. Her article Roadblocks: Cultural and Structural Impediments to Forensic Science Reform further examined the systemic challenges that impact the reliability and integrity of forensic science in legal proceedings.

Cino has also worked extensively on forensic science issues with the Department of Defense Forensic Science Center and the Department of Homeland Security, focusing on scientific integrity, evidentiary reliability, and forensic reform. In addition to her legal practice and research, she is a recognized media expert, providing commentary on forensic evidence and criminal law for PBS, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NPR, TruTV, and Discovery+.

She also spends a large amount of time on pro bono death penalty and innocence project cases.

Barbara Llewellyn, Ph.D., Forensic DNA Consulting

Barb Llewellyn is a highly experienced professional in the field of forensic DNA analysis and quality assurance, currently serving as the Program Manager for Relationship Testing at AABB since March 2024. Previous roles include Molecular Supervisor at Labcorp-MNG Laboratories and President of Barbara Llewellyn Forensic Consulting, Inc., where expertise in forensic DNA consulting was demonstrated through validation and casework review. Barb has held various leadership positions in multiple laboratories, including Quality Assurance Manager at Helix Genetic and Scientific Solutions and DNA Unit Technical Leader at St. Lucia Forensic Laboratory, focusing on training and analytical data review. With a Ph.D. in Pure and Applied Chemistry from the University of Strathclyde and a B.S. in Biology from the University of Mary Hardin-Baylor, Barb Llewellyn possesses a strong academic background supporting extensive professional expertise.

J.D. Schmid, Assistant Minnesota Sixth District Public Defender

Represent indigent clients charged with felonies, gross misdemeanors and misdemeanors. Lead the Sixth District Public Defenders’ Forensic Working Group. Provide consultations to other state public defenders.

Heather Wood, Staff Attorney, Tennessee Supreme Court (Moderator)

Breakout 7: Standing: Who can Sue These Days? (And are State Courts More

or Less

Plenary 10: Military Criminal Justice: What You Should Know