<p>Earprint biometrics has been proposed as a forensic identification method based on the distinctive morphology of the external human ear and the prints it may leave on surfaces during criminal activity. Since the late twentieth century, earprints have occasionally been introduced as evidence in criminal investigations and court proceedings in several jurisdictions, including the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and the United States. Despite these applications, the scientific validity of earprint comparison remains contested. This article presents a narrative review of the forensic, anthropological, and legal literature on earprint identification. It examines the development of earprint research from early anthropometric approaches to contemporary digital and automated comparison techniques. Particular attention is given to the anatomical basis of ear morphology, the classification of earprints, and the methodological frameworks used in forensic comparison. The review also evaluates empirical studies addressing variability in earprint deposition, examiner subjectivity, and the absence of validated statistical models for assessing evidential strength. The medico-legal implications of earprint evidence are examined through analysis of forensic casework and appellate decisions in which earprint testimony played a significant role. These cases illustrate the risks associated with the premature adoption of forensic techniques lacking standardized protocols and empirically established error rates. The review concludes that although earprints may provide investigative information and potentially corroborative evidence, current scientific limitations prevent their reliable use as independent identification evidence. Future progress requires standardized international protocols, large-scale validation studies, probabilistic interpretation frameworks, and interdisciplinary collaboration between forensic scientists, statisticians, and legal scholars.</p>