The U.S. Supreme Courtroomcould take into account DNA testing in a long-standing homicide case for which demise row inmate Rodney Reed was convicted greater than twenty years in the past.

Reed has lengthy maintained his innocence over the homicide of Stacey Stites, a 19-year-old who was raped and murdered as she made her method to work at a grocery store in Bastrop, Texas, in 1996.

Reed claims that Stites' fiancé, former police officer Jimmy Fennell, was the one who killed her because of Stites allegedly having an affair with Reed. Fennell has denied Reed's allegations. The case is additional difficult by earlier expenses towards each males, per The Texas Tribune.

Cotton swab and test tube
A inventory photograph exhibits a cotton swab and check tube. DNA testing has come a great distance in current a long time, a authorized skilled has mentioned.ronstik/Getty

Reed had beforehand sought DNA testing of crime scene proof associated to Stites' homicide—corresponding to a belt that prosecutors mentioned was used to strangle her—however had not been profitable. Prosecutors have argued that the DNA may have since been contaminated, in keeping with The Texas Tribune.

Now, the Supreme Courtroom has agreed to determine when prisoners can request post-conviction DNA testing of crime scene proof.

A press release from Reed's authorized staff mentioned, in keeping with the Innocence Undertaking, that Reed, a Black man, was convicted by an all-white Texas jury and that "Texas and the Texas courts have refused to permit DNA testing of key crime-scene proof, together with the ligature dealt with by the perpetrator within the fee of the crime."

Russell Covey is a legislation professor at Georgia State College who makes a speciality of wrongful convictions and is co-editor of The Wrongful Convictions Reader analysis assortment. He advised Newsweek there have been "super advances" in DNA know-how because the early 2000s to the extent that even a small variety of pores and skin cells left behind on objects on the scene of the crime could be thought-about.

As well as, strategies can now extract helpful info from samples that may have been thought-about too low in high quality twenty years in the past.

"All proof needs to be understood in context, and no proof is irrefutable," Covey mentioned. "However DNA proof has confirmed to be among the many strongest varieties of proof we now have, and virtually talking, it's typically dispositive of the query of guilt or innocence.

"If the organic samples are correctly saved, there's just about no 'expiration date' for the proof. DNA proof has been efficiently examined a long time after crimes occurred.

"There may be already a considerable quantity of proof that signifies that Mr. Reed may be harmless of the homicide of Ms. Stites. Actually, we all know that the prosecutor's concept at trial was based mostly on flawed and inaccurate medical proof.

"The proof within the case was that Ms. Stites was strangled together with her personal belt. That belt has by no means been examined for DNA, regardless that the killer's DNA would probably be there. If one other suspect's DNA was recovered from the belt, or from different objects that have been discovered on the crime scene, that proof could be extraordinarily useful in proving that Mr. Reed is definitely harmless of the crime."

Reed at the moment has no execution date after his impending execution was postponed in 2019 after requires additional evaluation of his conviction, The Texas Tribute reported. The justices are because of take up the case once more within the fall, in keeping with the Related Press.