Bill Text: IA HSB567 | 2019-2020 | 88th General Assembly | Introduced

---

Bill Title: A bill for an act relating to forensic scientific evidence and postconviction relief.

Spectrum: Committee Bill

Status: (N/A - Dead) 2020-02-20 - Committee report, recommending passage. H.J. 321. [HSB567 Detail]

Download: Iowa-2019-HSB567-Introduced.html

---

House Study Bill 567 - Introduced
HOUSE FILE _____
BY (PROPOSED COMMITTEE
ON JUDICIARY BILL BY
CHAIRPERSON HOLT)
A BILL FOR
An Act relating to forensic scientific evidence and
postconviction relief.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF IOWA:
TLSB 5225YC (7) 88
hf/rh

H.F. _____
Section 1. Section 822.2, subsection 1, Code 2020, is
amended by adding the following new paragraph:
NEW PARAGRAPH . i. There exists forensic scientific evidence
pursuant to section 822.2A.
Sec. 2. NEW SECTION . 822.2A Forensic scientific evidence.
1. As used in this section:
a. “Applied validity” means the reliability of a scientific
method or technique in practice.
b. “Forensic science” means the application of scientific or
technical practices to the recognition, collection, analysis,
and interpretation of evidence for criminal and civil law or
regulatory issues.
c. “Forensic scientific evidence” includes scientific or
technical knowledge including a forensic analyst’s or expert’s
scientific or technical knowledge or opinion and reports
offered by forensic analysts and experts; scientific standards,
and a scientific method or technique upon which forensic
scientific evidence is based.
d. “Foundational validity” means the reliability of a
scientific method that is repeatable, reproducible, and
accurate in a scientific setting.
e. “Scientific knowledge” includes knowledge of the general
scientific community and all fields of scientific knowledge
upon which those fields are based.
2. A person seeking relief under section 822.2, subsection
1, paragraph “i” , shall prove all of the following:
a. There is evidence of any of the following:
(1) Forensic scientific evidence that was not discoverable
through the exercise of reasonable diligence by the person
on the date of the person’s conviction or guilty plea. In
determining whether forensic scientific evidence was not
discoverable through the exercise of reasonable diligence prior
to the date of a person’s conviction or guilty plea, the court
shall consider whether a claim or issue could not have been
presented previously in the person’s original application or in
-1-
LSB 5225YC (7) 88
hf/rh 1/ 3

H.F. _____
any previously considered application if the claim or issue is
based on forensic scientific evidence that was not available
through the exercise of reasonable diligence by the person
on or before the date on which the original application or a
previously considered application, as applicable, was filed.
(2) Forensic scientific evidence that undermines the
forensic scientific evidence used to convict the person.
Forensic scientific evidence is considered to be undermined
if new research or information exists that repudiates the
foundational validity of scientific evidence or expert
testimony or the applied validity of a scientific method or
technique.
b. The person proves by a preponderance of the evidence
that had the forensic scientific evidence been presented at the
time of the person’s conviction or guilty plea, it would have
probably changed the result of the trial or voided the factual
basis of the guilty plea.
c. The forensic scientific evidence would have been
admissible under the Iowa rules of evidence in existence at the
time of the person’s conviction or guilty plea.
3. Claims brought pursuant to section 822.2, subsection
1, paragraph “i” , are not subject to the limitation periods
provided in section 822.3.
4. This section does not create a cause of action against
an expert who repudiates the expert’s opinion during any
proceeding that resulted in a conviction or whose opinion
has been undermined by subsequent scientific research or
technological advancements.
EXPLANATION
The inclusion of this explanation does not constitute agreement with
the explanation’s substance by the members of the general assembly.
This bill allows a court to grant postconviction relief
if a person who files an application for postconviction
relief proves all of the following: 1) there is forensic
scientific evidence that was not discoverable at the time of
-2-
LSB 5225YC (7) 88
hf/rh 2/ 3

H.F. _____
the person’s conviction or guilty plea or that undermines
forensic scientific evidence used to convict the person, 2)
the person proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the
forensic scientific evidence would have probably changed the
result of the trial or voided the factual basis of the guilty
plea, and 3) the forensic scientific evidence would have been
admissible under the Iowa rules of evidence in existence at the
time of the person’s conviction or guilty plea.
The bill provides that in determining whether forensic
scientific evidence was not discoverable through the exercise
of reasonable diligence, a court shall consider whether the
claim or issue could not have been presented previously in the
person’s original application or in any previously considered
application.
Under the bill, a claim for postconviction relief based
upon forensic scientific evidence is not subject to the time
limitations in Code section 822.3. The bill does not create a
cause of action against an expert who repudiates the expert’s
original opinion during any proceeding that resulted in a
conviction or whose opinion is undermined by any subsequent
scientific research or technological advancement.
The bill provides definitions of “forensic science”,
“forensic scientific evidence”, “scientific knowledge”,
“applied validity”, and “foundational validity”.
-3-
LSB 5225YC (7) 88
hf/rh 3/ 3