The key evidence came from a man who said Harvey had confessed to him. Fairfax officials turned down Harvey's initial request for DNA testing, saying a negative result would not prove his innocence because there were two assailants. But Bryan wrote that Harvey may still have a constitutional right to testing. If other courts adopt that part of the decision, it could open the floodgates for testing requests, said Joshua Marquis, a board member of the National District Attorneys Association. This is extremely far-reaching. . . .
Every new technology means the system starts all over. . . .
Gould had argued that Harvey's case should be dismissed because his civil rights suit was essentially an end run around the strict rules and time limits for criminal appeals. But Bryan refused to throw out the case, ruling that denial of DNA testing is a new civil rights claim, separate from the strictly regulated habeas corpus process. Indeed, more than half of defendants granted DNA testing after conviction have their guilt confirmed. Peter Neufeld, co-founder with Scheck of the Innocence Project, said he believes that the judge will ultimately order DNA testing. News Jobs AP Shopping Archives Entertain.