Crime Lab Under Fire - Convictions Thrown Out in Drug Cases

Virginia drug possession and distribution cases involving marijuana, cocaine, heroine and other controlled substances cannot usually be proved without a laboratory analysis proving the substance submitted for testing by police officers is an illegal substance to posssess. Prosecutors usually rely on testing performed by the Consolidated Labs, a state agency primarily located in Richmond, which issues a certificate of analysis that constitutes the findings of its testing. Virtually every state or localality maintains a laboratory to conduct these types of examinations for this purpose.

The lab technicians who perform these tests are well-trained, but not necessarily perfect. As the most experienced Virginia criminal defense attorneys know, a lawyer's duty is to examine and question the accuracy of drug testing results when they are necessary to conviction. A recent item in California illustrates why vigilence must be constant in the operating procedures of the police who gather and submit evidence, and in those laboratories which perform the forensic analyses.

Hundreds of drug cases have been dismissed and hundreds more are being examined in SanFrancisco by prosecutors who are scrambling to deal with the fallout from accusations that a technician in the Police Department’s crime laboratory was stealing cocaine for personal use.

The technician, Deborah Jean Madden, 60, has not been charged, though the San Francisco police say she is under investigation. Ms. Madden, who retired last month, did not return calls for comment.

Brian Buckelew, a spokesman for District Attorney Kamala D. Harris, said Friday that his department was looking at cases dating to 2007, many of which involved felony possession.

Some 600 cases have already been dismissed or discharged since Ms. Madden’s suspected thefts and the closing of the laboratory were brought to light by the police, though Mr. Buckelew said many of those cases would be pursued after testing is done by an independent laboratory. Mr. Buckelew said his office was hoping to salvage some dismissed cases by using other types of evidence, including witness testimony and confessions.

“Where there’s a way to prove it,” he said, “we intend to prove it.”

But the scandal has confirmed many public defenders’ long-held suspicions about the quality of work at the laboratory, concerns that were echoed by a blistering independent audit released in late March.

An audit in November had also found lab problems, including understaffing to the point that mandatory overtime had become the norm, necessitated by the need to complete testing within 48 hours to prevent the dismissal of criminal charges. That report also found insufficient training in some areas, among other things. The audit also showed that Ms. Madden had been “repeatedly counseled” for an incident in which she failed to properly describe in her notes the packaging of seized items.

The police said they began investigating possible evidence tampering in December and interviewed Ms. Madden in late February. About a week later, a search warrant was served for her home in San Mateo County, south of the city, and she was arrested by county sheriff’s officers on a separate charges.