Based on their empirical study of New York's computerized criminal history information system and on their national surveys of similar systems, Professors Doernberg and Zeigler conclude that current regulations governing the dispersion of criminal history information are grossly inadequate. Although information drawn from computerized criminal history files is often inaccurate, incomplete, or inappropriate, that information is routinely used by criminal justice officials and judges to make decisions affecting defendants'liberty. The authors argue that this practice is unconstitutional and suggest ways to regulate criminal history information suystems that would protect a defendant's right not to be deprived of liberty without due process of law.
Donald L. Doernberg & Donald H. Zeigler, Due Process Versus Data Processing: An Analysis of Computerized Criminal History Information Systems, 55 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 1110 (1980), available at http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/lawfaculty/54/.