Bills › 88th General Assembly

HF 2509Died when the session ended · February 24, 2020

Relating to forensic scientific evidence and postconviction relief

Sponsored by the House Judiciary Committee

Topics:Courts & civil lawCrime & corrections

Same legislation: SSB 3082, HSB 567

Where it is now

  1. Done: IntroducedFebruary 24, 2020
  2. Stopped: SubcommitteeDied when the General Assembly ended
  3. Next: House committee
  4. Next: Passes the House
  5. Next: Senate committee
  6. Next: Passes the Senate
  7. Next: To the Governor
  8. Next: Signed into law

Died when the session ended The 2020 session adjourned on June 14, 2020, the General Assembly’s last regular session. Bills that didn’t pass both chambers died. What’s a funnel?

What’s in it

AI summary People who have already been convicted of a crime can ask a court to change their sentence if new scientific evidence comes to light. To win, they must show that this evidence was not available before and likely would have changed the outcome of their trial. Unlike other types of legal appeals, these specific claims do not have a time limit for when they must be filed.1

Read the official explanation

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 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.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”.

Full bill text2

Iowa Code it changes

Creates§822.2A

Amends§822.2

How the Code works3

Lobbying

5 for · 2 against · 6 undecided · Who →

Family tree