Richard C. Dieter [Executive Director, Death Penalty Information Center]: "Almost every state in the country guarantees defendants the right to have DNA evidence tested after their trial. Unfortunately for William Osborne, Alaska is not one of those states. That is why Osborne has asked the federal courts to order the state to allow DNA testing of evidence that was used to convict him at his trial in 1994. Today, more sophisticated testing might exonerate Osborne, if the testing is allowed. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has held that Osborne does have a right to such testing, but Alaska has appealed to the Supreme Court. Now the Court has agreed to hear this issue in District Attorney's Office v. Osborne (No. 08-6).

This case again brings before the Court the difficult question of what the constitution requires if a convicted defendant offers substantial evidence of his innocence long after trial. A similar issue has arisen in the Troy Davis case from Georgia, where the state wanted to proceed with Davis' execution despite the fact that 7 eyewitnesses who testified against him at trial have recanted their testimony. Although the U.S. Supreme Court did not take his case on appeal from the Georgia Supreme Court, another federal court has agreed to consider the fundamental questions surrounding free-standing claims of innocence.

Osborne's claim is simpler in that DNA testing has become fairly routine and does not require courts to assess the credibility of witnesses. There is also no execution date pending since this is not a death penalty case. The testing might exonerate Osborne, confirm his guilt, or be inconclusive. But in any event, the state and the justice system would have additional critical knowledge that is easily available, but is now lacking. It seems a small price to pay to avoid the lengthy imprisonment of an innocent person."