PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Dookhan worked out of the Hinton State Laboratory Institute in Jamaica Plain. In the scandal’s wake, then-Gov. Deval Patrick shut down the Hinton Lab and prosecutors were forced to overturn convictions. The roughly 31,000 defendants were awarded $14 million in a class-action settlement. Dookhan was sentenced to three-to-five years in prison after pleading guilty to several counts of obstruction of justice, perjury and tampering with evidence. Out in western Massachusetts, Farak’s misconduct at the Amherst state lab led to the dismissal of thousands of drug convictions. Farak was sentenced to 18 months of incarceration after it was revealed she was stealing and using some of the drugs that she was meant to be testing."
----------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Annie Dookhan and Sonja Farak drug lab scandal fallout: Massachusetts federal court rules on seized property, by Reporter Rick Sowby, published by The Boston Herald. on January 24, 2025.
SUB-HEADING: "More than 30,000 cases were tossed."
GIST: "The criminal defendants in the more than 30,000 state drug cases that were tossed due to the tampering forensic chemists cannot get back any of their property seized in connection with the wrongful convictions.
That’s according to the Massachusetts federal appeals court, which has ruled in favor of Attorney General Andrea Campbell, district attorneys across the Bay State, local police departments and other state officials.
This federal lawsuit arises from the criminal actions of two former state forensic chemists, Annie Dookhan and Sonja Farak, who tampered with evidence, falsified drug results, and committed perjury in state court drug cases beginning in about 2004.
After their misconduct was discovered a decade later, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court vacated and dismissed with prejudice more than 30,000 drug cases tainted by their involvement.
Eventually, the SJC also determined that affected people were entitled to the repayment of most funds collected as a consequence of their now-vacated convictions, under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
However, the SJC ruled that the individuals were not entitled to the automatic return of any forfeited property seized in connection with those convictions.
That state ruling led to criminal defendants bringing this federal case against state officials and departments, seeking a federal court order that would essentially require the automatic return of their forfeited property.
The state officials and departments in response said the federal case should be dismissed, arguing that the claims were barred by the Eleventh Amendment — which bans suits in federal court against a state by its own citizens. The federal district court dismissed the complaint in part.
“It held that it could not order the automatic return of plaintiffs’ forfeited property, but that plaintiffs’ other claims could proceed under the Ex parte Young exception to the Eleventh Amendment, which permits suits against state officials in federal court in certain circumstances,” the past ruling stated.
Then that federal district court ruling was appealed, leading to this week’s ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
The appeals court ruled that the Eleventh Amendment prohibits all of the relief sought by the criminal defendants.
“Plaintiffs’ attempt to recover their forfeited property focuses on a past alleged wrong, but the Ex parte Young exception applies only when individuals seek prospective relief against a state official’s ongoing violation of federal law,” the appeals court wrote.
“Because there is no ongoing violation to anchor plaintiffs’ various claims, there is no prospective or ancillary relief to grant,” the court added.
Even if the state agencies’ continued withholding of the forfeited property did violate federal law, it would be a past violation, not an ongoing one, according to the court.
The criminal defendants’ lawsuit against the state officials and departments should be fully dismissed, the appeals court ruled.
“Like the SJC, we acknowledge the tremendous harm caused by Farak and Dookhan’s egregious misconduct,” the court wrote. “But the Eleventh Amendment bars federal courts from providing the relief plaintiffs seek here. For these reasons, we reverse the district court’s partial denial of the Commonwealth defendants’ motion to dismiss and remand to the district court with instructions to dismiss the complaint in full.”
Dookhan worked out of the Hinton State Laboratory Institute in Jamaica Plain. In the scandal’s wake, then-Gov. Deval Patrick shut down the Hinton Lab and prosecutors were forced to overturn convictions. The roughly 31,000 defendants were awarded $14 million in a class-action settlement.
Dookhan was sentenced to three-to-five years in prison after pleading guilty to several counts of obstruction of justice, perjury and tampering with evidence.
Out in western Massachusetts, Farak’s misconduct at the Amherst state lab led to the dismissal of thousands of drug convictions. Farak was sentenced to 18 months of incarceration after it was revealed she was stealing and using some of the drugs that she was meant to be testing."
The entire story can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
———————————————————————————————
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
