000			02865nam a2200241 4500
001			391201
090			_a391201
100			_a20121012d2012 y0pory50 ba
101			_aeng
200			_aPost-conviction DNA testing and wrongful conviction _bRecurso eletrónico _fJohn Roman ... [et al.]
210			_aWashington, DC _cUrban Institute _d2012
215			_a1 CD-ROM _d12 cm
300			_aResearch report submitted by the Urban Institute - Justice Policy Center and supported by Contract No. 2008F-08165 awarded by the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice. Ficheiro de 2,60 MB em formato PDF (69 p.). Disponível também em: https://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412589-Post-Conviction-DNA-Testing-and-Wrongful-Conviction.pdf. Acedido a 12 de outubro de 2012.
330			_aGlossary. Executive summary. What this report can and cannot say about wrongful conviction. What is wrongful conviction? What has previous research determined contributes to wrongful convictions? Eyewitness identification and informants. Forensic evidence. Confessions. How does post-conviction DNA testing detect wrongful convictions? The Virginia model of post-conviction DNA testing relief. Virginia in the 1970s and 1980s. Data. Case selection. Data collection. Coding schema. Quality control. Court data collection. County data collection. Data limitations. Generalizability. Omitted variables. Missingness. Measures. Post-conviction DNA testing variables. Preconviction forensic testing variables. Case characteristics. Convicted offender/victim demographics. Conviction county characteristics (Virginia). Methodology. Dropping nonsexual assault homicide convictions. Logistic regressions. Multinomial/Sequential logistic regression/Propensity score analysis. Clustering. Results. What proportion of convictions had determinate DNA testing results? What factors distinguish convictions with determinate and indeterminate DNA testing results? What model predicts whether DNA testing results on a case will lead to determinate or indeterminate conclusions about conviction? What factors distinguish inculpatory sexual assault convictions from all convictions with exculpatory evidence (either currently insufficient or supportive of exoneration)? What model predicts whether determinate DNA testing results on a conviction will be exculpatory or inculpatory regarding a convicted offender’s actual innocence? Does the same model predict exculpatory DNA testing results supporting exoneration, as opposed to inculpatory results? Case studies. Discussion.
606			_aADN _9243660
606			_aPROVA _9233195
606			_aVALOR PROBATÓRIO _921050
606			_aSANÇÃO PENAL _9227850
710			_aPOST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING AND WRONGFUL CONVICTION _9356890
955			_xOferta