- 01.
Not undated boilerplate: the PCAST 2016 latent-print finding is source-linked to the report, so the citation is one you can verify before you file. PCAST classified latent prints as foundationally valid BUT with a substantial false-positive rate, most defense motions miss the second clause.
- 02.
FBI's 2011 black-box study reported 1-in-306; the more conservative Miami-Dade 2014 study reported 1-in-18.
- 03.
Examiners are still trained to claim 'individualization to the exclusion of all others', a phrasing PCAST explicitly rejected.
The controlling authority this template is built on.
Before you buy, see the spine of the deliverable. Verbatim quotes are reproduced word for word from the opinion they cite; any attributed summary is labelled as a summary, never dressed up as a quote. Each entry links to its source so you can confirm it yourself. Nothing is paraphrased into a citation it does not support.
- Lead controlling authorityVerbatim quote
“Of the two appropriately designed black-box studies, the larger study (FBI 2011 study) yielded a false positive rate that is unlikely to exceed 1 in 306 conclusive examinations while the other (Miami-Dade 2014 study) yielded a considerably higher false positive rate of 1 in 18.”
- Supporting authorityVerbatim quote
“PCAST finds that latent fingerprint analysis is a foundationally valid subjective methodology—albeit with a false positive rate that is substantial and is likely to be higher than expected by many jurors based on longstanding claims about the infallibility of fingerprint analysis.”
Provenance: every citation above carries a source URL that was fetched and confirmed reachable when the template was authored. A citation without a working source URL does not ship. Counsel of record adapts the motion language to circuit-specific precedent and the facts of the case before filing.
Order intake.
Frequently asked questions.
What does the brief contain?
Seven sections: cover (your case identifier + jurisdiction stamped on), reliability standard recap (Daubert v. Merrell Dow factors), the lead authority's verbatim finding with source URL, the cumulative-error history with cited exonerations / IG audits / appellate opinions, recommended FRE 702 motion language (~250 words editable), a 10-15 question cross-examination question bank, and the methods + source URLs bibliography.
Is this legal advice?
No. The template is a research artifact modeled on the published critique literature for this discipline. Counsel of record adapts the motion language to the controlling circuit's FRE 702 doctrine and the facts of the case before filing.
How fast is delivery?
Stripe checkout completes in seconds; the PDF is emailed to the address you provide. Templates are pre-built, there is no per-case data pipeline running.
Do you cite anything I cannot independently verify?
No. Every citation in every brief carries a source URL stored alongside. Lead authorities are PCAST 2016, NAS 2009 / 2014, NRC 1979 / 2003, FBI/DOJ 2015. All are public-domain and linked to their original publication pages.
Refund policy?
7-day full refund, no questions asked.