ABSTRACT
This chapter describes what finality is, where it comes from, why it led to current post-conviction procedures, and why those procedures are outdated and unjust. It explains the finality doctrine and the arguments that support it. It also addresses some of the common misconceptions about the processes available to free the innocent, and explains how post-conviction procedures clash with notions of justice and fairness because they operate to prevent courts from reassessing the accuracy of a conviction once the trial is over. The chapter also provides a hypothetical case to explain how the current post-conviction procedures clash with an inmate's claims of innocence. It suggests a new approach to post-conviction procedures, one that accounts for a new understanding of the accuracy of most traditional forms of criminal evidence.
