Skinner v. Switzer

In 1995, a Texas jury sentenced Henry Skinner (plaintiff) to death after convicting him of brutally murdering his live-in girlfriend, Twila Busby, and her two sons. Home at the time, Skinner was incapacitated by large quantities of alcohol and codeine. Evidence suggested Busby’s uncle, who had a history of physical and sexual abuse, could have been the perpetrator. Many biological samples were collected, but few were tested at trial, in part because Skinner’s attorney feared they would implicate Skinner. In 2001, Texas enacted Article 64, allowing incarcerated individuals to obtain postconviction DNA testing in limited circumstances. Under Article 64, one must show that at the time of trial the testing was not available or was too primitive to produce probative results. Alternatively, one may show that evidence was not previously tested through no fault of the claimant and that the interests of justice require a postconviction order for testing. A court must further find that a movant would not have been convicted if exculpatory DNA testing had occurred and that the request was not made to delay the execution of the sentence. Skinner twice petitioned in state court to have the evidence tested but was twice denied. Skinner then filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for injunctive relief against Lynn Switzer (defendant), the district attorney whose office prosecuted Skinner and had the evidence Skinner wanted tested. Skinner challenged the validity of the statute, not the state-court rulings. The district court rejected the claim, citing circuit precedent that postconviction DNA testing requests can only be brought in habeas corpus, not under § 1983. The court of appeals affirmed. To address a circuit split, the Supreme Court granted certiorari.