Hundreds of Convictions Compromised By CBI Lab Scandal. Is Yours One of Them?

Prosecutors are scrambling to inform hundreds of defendants, whose cases hinged on the DNA tests processed by a disgraced Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI) scientist, of possible misconduct. 

In February, the CBI released preliminary findings of an internal investigation into former scientist Yvonne “Missy” Woods’ decades-long career with the agency. The investigation indicates Woods tampered with evidence by deleting data and manipulating quality control measures in over 600 cases between 2008 and 2023. That number does not include the cases in which Woods was considered a witness. 

The agency is still reviewing cases, some as early as 1994, for signs of additional misconduct by Woods.

Robinson & Henry obtained a redacted version of the Internal Affairs Investigative Report into Woods’ conduct. According to the report, Woods was to be placed on Administrative Leave on Tuesday, October 3, 2023, for “alleged untruthful conduct in the workplace surrounding possible deleted data and mis-reporting of the results.” 

Specifically, CBI’s Quality Management team determined that Woods omitted material facts from official criminal justice records by tampering with the controlled variables used to test crime scene DNA. In some cases, the agency says it found evidence that Woods didn’t troubleshoot issues that surfaced during the testing process and instead opted to alter or delete data to conceal her shortcomings. 

This egregious form of misconduct calls into question the reliability and integrity of Woods’ lab work. Equally concerning is how long the CBI waited to investigate and discipline her. The integrity of Woods’ work was first questioned nearly a decade ago. If this crisis continues to grow, there may be a push for CBI to lose accreditation. 

Certainly, no matter what happens, there will likely be an effect on the court system. I expect we’ll see increased scrutiny of the science and discovery provided by CBI and the filing of many Crim. P. 35(c) motions. These post-conviction relief petition challenges can include constitutional violations, jurisdiction issues, newly discovered evidence, or ineffective legal counsel. 

Violations of Due Process 

Woods’ misconduct has likely violated hundreds of defendants’ due process rights. 

The Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantee all citizens the right to legal resolution according to established rules and principles. CBI’s initial investigation found that Woods deviated from standard testing protocol and cut corners. Per CBI’s policies and procedures, it was Woods’ duty to conduct additional testing to ensure the reliability of her results. 

If Woods’ misconduct involved presenting unreliable forensic evidence in the courtroom, it could have significantly prejudiced a defendant’s right to a fair trial. This aligns with how a Colorado Court of Appeals partially reversed a postconviction court’s order denying a defendant an evidentiary hearing. The hearing concerned new information related to a forensic science practice relevant to a class 1 felony conviction. 

People v. Genrich demonstrates that defendants have a right to an evidentiary hearing in postconviction court if new convincing evidence emerges that casts doubt on the legality of the original conviction.

You Have Options for Post-conviction Relief 

Post-conviction relief is your right to challenge your verdict or sentence. However, you’ll need the assistance of a criminal defense attorney to exercise this right effectively. Robinson & Henry has never shied away from defending people wrongfully accused, and the same can be said for post-conviction cases.

Our entire criminal justice system relies upon the prosecution and its witnesses playing by “the rules”; that is, in part, ensuring that the full and proper disclosure of discovery is happening. Adhering to the guidelines ensures defendants and their counsel have all evidence – inculpatory and exculpatory – so that the best defense can be presented.

CBI and State Negligence: A Basis for Review

The failure of CBI and the State of Colorado to notify defendants of issues involving Woods’s work is tantamount to the illegal suppression of relevant evidence. This may be the basis for having convictions at trial reviewed and possibly overturned by a reviewing court.

At Robinson & Henry, our Criminal Defense Team is here to do what is best for you — especially when reviewing your conviction to see if the State failed to adhere to its obligations.

Find Out if the CBI Lab Scandal Affected Your Case

Look, post-conviction cases aren’t easy. They require skilled criminal defense attorneys who can navigate conflict of interest rules and post-conviction procedures. The CBI lab scandal itself is messy, and district attorneys’ offices have received little to no guidance on how to contact defendants affected by Woods’ misconduct and the agency’s slow reaction to it. 

Prosecutors now must ensure all defendants with cases that involved Woods’ discredited forensic work receive access to her discovery. Her discovery can be used as evidence in a post-conviction case that could lead to your or your loved one’s acquittal. 

Call R&H for a Case Assessment

If you received discovery or suspect you’re entitled to discovery because Woods was involved in you or your loved one’s wrongful conviction, we encourage you to connect with Robinson & Henry. We can help you find out once and for all, if the CBI’s negligence impacted the outcome of your case, and if so, fight for your acquittal in post-conviction court. Call 303-688-0944 to begin your case assessment.