Colorado's discredited DNA Scientist Yvonne Missy Woods debacle: (From our 'what are they so anxious to hide?' department): Colorado Politics (Reporter Michael Karlik) reports that attorneys are being frustrated in their efforts to obtain information on convictions which have been impacted by Wood's misconduct, noting that: "Yvonne "Missy" Woods stands accused of intentionally deleting data, manipulating procedures and compromising criminal evidence in her role as a former CBI employee. She faces 102 felony counts alleging systemic misconduct and is awaiting trial. So far, CBI (Colorado Bureau of Investigation) acknowledged finding problems in nearly one in 10 of the more than 10,780 cases she worked during her 29-year career at the lab. A Boulder County judge vacated a man's murder conviction earlier this year based on now-unreliable DNA evidence handled by Woods. However, the Office of the State Public Defender attempted last summer to seek records about all cases in which Woods was the DNA analyst, the technical reviewer or a courtroom witness. In response, the CBI withheld large swaths of information."

QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Everyone with one of these cases is trying to get access to the information,' said defense attorney Mary Claire Mulligan, speaking about convictions impacted by a DNA scientist's misconduct."

——————————————————————

SECOND QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Defense attorney Mary Claire Mulligan, who is working on cases for defendants affected by Woods' actions, said the court's interpretation of the law will have relatively little legal impact beyond requiring lawyers to file separate cases in Jeffco to access CBI data. The larger problem, she said, is the government's lack of transparency about Woods' work in the first place. "Everyone with one of these cases is trying to get access to the information. Which brings us back to why CBI won’t just turn over what appears to be obviously disclosable information," she said. "And why the AG’s office decided to file a (petition with the Supreme Court) to keep this information from the clients whom it directly affects."

----------------------------------------------------------------

STORY: "Colorado justices say access to Missy Woods data must be litigated in Jeffco, (Jefferson County)  by Crime and Justice Reporter Michael Karlik, published by Colorado Politics, on June 11, 2025."

'Everyone with one of these cases is trying to get access to the information,' said defense attorney Mary Claire Mulligan, speaking about convictions impacted by a DNA scientist's misconduct

GIST: "The Colorado Supreme Court ruled on Monday that defense attorneys seeking access to withheld information about a former DNA scientist's misconduct must pursue the data in Jefferson County, where the Colorado Bureau of Investigation is located.

Yvonne "Missy" Woods stands accused of intentionally deleting data, manipulating procedures and compromising criminal evidence in her role as a former CBI employee. She faces 102 felony counts alleging systemic misconduct and is awaiting trial.

So far, CBI acknowledged finding problems in nearly one in 10 of the more than 10,780 cases she worked during her 29-year career at the lab. A Boulder County judge vacated a man's murder conviction earlier this year based on now-unreliable DNA evidence handled by Woods.

However, the Office of the State Public Defender attempted last summer to seek records about all cases in which Woods was the DNA analyst, the technical reviewer or a courtroom witness. In response, the CBI withheld large swaths of information.

At the same time, Douglas County prosecutors were pursuing a case against Adetayo Sotade alleging sexual assault and other crimes. The defense listed Woods as one of its witnesses, as she was the technical reviewer for DNA testing in Sotade's case.

After CBI largely denied the public defender's request for Woods-related data, Sotade's attorney then filed an application through his criminal case for CBI to explain in court why it was allowed to withhold the details pursuant to the Colorado Criminal Justice Records Act.

CBI, which is located in Lakewood, argued a Douglas County judge had no authority to hear the motion. The criminal justice records law requires such requests to be filed in the jurisdiction "wherein the record is found." For CBI, that meant Jeffco.

In December, Douglas County District Court Judge Victoria Klingensmith sided with Sotade's attorney and ordered the CBI to explain why it need not release the entirety of the records.

The bureau quickly appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Colorado Criminal Justice Records Act "provides predictability to criminal justice agencies and prevents their records custodians from being forced to travel across the state and expend limited public resources responding to show cause hearings in any civil or criminal proceeding where a party also seeks records through the CCJRA," argued Assistant Attorney General Kelley M. Dziedzic.

Klingensmith and Sotade's attorneys responded that challenging a records denial in the location of the records is one way, but not the only way, to move forward. The Colorado Attorney General's Office argued it would be more efficient for a judge familiar with a defendant's criminal case to also handle the records-related litigation.

"Mr. Sotade could be forced to go to trial without having access to records that he might be entitled to under the CCJRA. Then, after a verdict, if the Jefferson County District Court grants Mr. Sotade access to the records, Mr. Sotade could be in possession of potentially exculpatory evidence after the resolution of his criminal case," the office wrote on behalf of Klingensmith.

The Supreme Court disagreed, finding the law clearly required the public defender's office to litigate the denial of records in Jeffco, not through an individual defendant's criminal case.

Given the "statewide impacts of Woods’s misconduct on past and pending criminal cases, the CBI could potentially be forced to attend show-cause hearings in any number of Colorado jurisdictions to defend the custodian’s denial of the CCJRA request," wrote Justice Melissa Hart in the June 9 opinion. "It is far more practical and consistent with the statute that a show-cause hearing be held in Jefferson County, where the records are located."

Defense attorney Mary Claire Mulligan, who is working on cases for defendants affected by Woods' actions, said the court's interpretation of the law will have relatively little legal impact beyond requiring lawyers to file separate cases in Jeffco to access CBI data. The larger problem, she said, is the government's lack of transparency about Woods' work in the first place.

"Everyone with one of these cases is trying to get access to the information. Which brings us back to why CBI won’t just turn over what appears to be obviously disclosable information," she said. "And why the AG’s office decided to file a (petition with the Supreme Court) to keep this information from the clients whom it directly affects."

The public defender's office did not respond to questions about the decision and the attorney general's office declined to comment.

The case is People v. Sotade;

https://www.coloradopolitics.com/courts/colorado-justices-say-access-to-missy-woods-data-must-be-litigated-in-jeffco/article_9264665b-7e13-4ccd-acdc-85488a8d014e.html

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;

——————————————————————————————————