Deoxyribonucleic acid, separation of powers, and justice.

• Author: Coxe, III, Henry M.
• Position: Florida - President's page

No mention was made on the floor of the Florida House of Representatives on April 27, 2006, of James Watson, Francis Crick, Maurice Wilkins, or Czech monk Gregory Mandel. All (except Mandel) were awarded Nobel Laureates in 1962. Nor did anyone refer to 19th century Swiss physician Friedrich Miercher. The debate was about deadlines, finality, victim rights, rule-making authority, human failures, and justice. The focus was DNA (not its discoverers above) which prompted an emotional, intellectual dialogue followed by an affirmation by the House that no American system of justice will tolerate an innocent person in our prisons.

Addressing the American Judicature Society in November, 2005, Associate U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy observed, "In the end--in the end--science seeks for truth. In the end--law seeks for truth. And in the end, both of us use our discipline to shape our destiny and to ensure human progress, and we must do this together." This marriage of law and science has merged the universe of genetics, strands of double helix and noncoding with a human system of justice, one that must never lose sight of its single greatest strength which is also its critical weakness--it is dependent upon humans.

The issue before the legislature appeared simple. Should a deadline be legislated which would prevent an inmate failing to meet that deadline from making a preliminary showing of innocence entitling the inmate to DNA testing?

The Florida Supreme Court temporarily suspended the statutory deadline of October 1, 2003. Legislation enacted a new deadline of October 1, 2005, which the court extended until July 1, 2006, to give legislators an opportunity to totally eliminate the deadline.

In a dissent to the Supreme Court's first extension, Justice Wells wrote," ... this Court does not have jurisdiction to 'suspend' a provision of a lawfully enacted statute...." This historical tension was not lost on the legislature. Included in the staff analysis for HB 61, the bill which proposed elimination of any deadline for DNA testing under appropriate circumstances, was a lengthy analysis of the bill's broader implications including the rule-making authority of the two institutions, beginning, "This bill could raise concerns regarding separation of powers."

The executive branch had already addressed DNA testing when Gov. Bush issued Executive Order 05-160, which mandated that all government entities preserve physical evidence which might be...