Archive for the ‘Prosecutorial misconduct’ Category


Subject of Popular Podcast Granted New Trial

Kate Mathis — July 07, 2016 @ 1:00 PM — Comments (0)

Back in February, an article posted to our blog detailed how the popular podcast Serial’s Adnan Syed was granted a post-conviction relief hearing. Well, Syed supporters, rejoice—the podcast’s protagonist has now been granted a new trial. On Thursday, June 30, Baltimore City Circuit Judge Martin Welch overturned Syed’s conviction, granting him a new trial on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel.

During his trial in 1999, the State’s evidence against him included call records that are now known to be unreliable, the inconsistent statements and testimony of star witness Jay Wilds, and Syed’s vague memory of the day of the murder and failure to provide an alibi. The State also raised a questionable claim that Syed had motive to kill his ex-girlfriend because he was angry that she had a new boyfriend and presented a select few entries from her diary that may have suggested “intimate partner violence” and that Syed was possessive while they were dating. Those claims were not supported by expert testimony, however, and no other evidence or witness testimony corroborated them either. Despite the State’s circumstantial evidence, no witnesses placing them together around the time of the disappearance and murder, and a lack of physical evidence linking him to the crime, Syed was convicted in 2000 for the 1999 murder of his ex-girlfriend, Hae Min Lee.

At the February hearing, Syed’s attorneys presented three arguments as to why their client should be granted post-conviction relief, the first two of which were denied. The first request focused on how Syed’s original trial attorney, Cristina Gutierrez, failed to provide effective counsel when she neglected to contact a potential alibi witness. Asia McClain Chapman had sent two letters to Syed following his arrest, claiming that she, her boyfriend, and her boyfriend’s friend had all seen him at a public library around the time that the State alleges Syed murdered Lee. She also claims that she remembers speaking with him. Although Syed handed that information over to Gutierrez, the potential alibi witness said no attorney ever contacted her. In his opinion, Welch wrote that while Gutierrez did err in not contacting McClain, this did not prejudice the defense nor would it have affected the verdict because the State’s case was not centered on the time of the murder.

The defense’s second request for post-conviction relief argued that a Brady violation occurred because the State failed to disclose potentially exculpatory evidence when they presented Syed’s cell phone records during trial, but did not include a fax cover sheet that addressed the reliability of cell tower location evidence. The State’s case rested on Wilds’ testimony coupled with phone records showing two incoming calls that prosecutors used to place Syed in the park where Lee’s body was found at the time she was buried. The fax cover sheet, however, contained a disclaimer that indicated “incoming calls are not reliable for determining location.” Welch ultimately agreed with the State though, writing that Syed’s right to raise a Brady violation was waived because he had the opportunity to do so in prior court proceedings.

The third argument presented by Syed’s attorneys is what won him a new trial. The defense claimed that Gutierrez provided ineffective assistance of counsel because she failed to cross-examine Abraham Waranowitz, the State’s cell tower expert witness, about the reliability of cell tower location evidence using the disclaimer that was not included with Syed’s cell phone records. During the trial in 1999, Waranowitz testified that a person’s approximate location during a phone call could be determined using call records to pinpoint which cell tower was pinged during the call. In 2015, however, Waranowitz signed an affidavit retracting his original testimony, stating that the prosecutor did not make him aware of the disclaimer regarding the reliability of incoming calls for determining location, which would have affected his testimony since he was not given the proper instructions for analyzing Syed’s call records. During the February hearing, the State again argued that like the defense’s allegation of a Brady violation, the defendant did not raise the issue in prior proceedings and therefore waived his right to challenge Gutierrez’s representation of him. Welch wrote that although Syed did fail to address his original trial attorney’s ineffective assistance of counsel in prior proceedings, he waived the right without “intelligently and knowingly” doing so, and thus vacated his conviction and granted the Serial star a new trial.

In regards to Serial, Welch wrote that despite the case’s popularity due to the podcast, he did his best to consider the merits of the Syed’s request for post-conviction relief like he would in any other case. Justin Brown, one of Syed’s attorneys, however, credited the podcast with the outcome of the hearing, stating that they would not be where they are today without it.

Not everyone is happy with Welch’s decision, though, especially Lee’s family members. In a statement issued by the family, they expressed disappointment with the judge’s ruling, stating that they are still grieving and believe that Syed is guilty.

The Maryland Office of the Attorney General said the State plans to appeal Welch’s decision, and according to Brown, has 30 days to decide what they will do next. Brown also stated that regardless of what the State chooses to do next, the defense has started preparing for retrial anyways, including partnering with Hogan Lovells—a major law firm that agreed to provide their extensive experience with trials and innocence cases pro-bono. In addition, Brown said that his client should be allowed out of prison on bail because he not a flight risk or a danger to the community, and although it has not yet been determined, the defense team might pursue a bail hearing for Syed.

post-conviction,Prosecutorial misconduct, , , , , ,


Prosecutor Disbarred for Sending Innocent Man to Death Row

Kate Mathis — February 16, 2016 @ 4:00 PM — Comments (0)

Although we would like to think everyone working in our criminal justice system works to achieve fair treatment and justice for all citizens, that is unfortunately not always the case. Misconduct by law enforcement or prosecutors can occur during any stage of the justice process. In fact, official misconduct was involved in a record number of 65 cases of individuals whot were exonerated in 2015. In addition, three quarters of those were homicide cases carrying hefty punishments.

The few individuals who commit these wrongful actions are rarely punished. For one exonerated man, however, another small victory was achieved following the disbarment of the prosecutor that wrongly sent him to death row.

Anthony Graves was convicted in Texas in 1994 for murder and arson. He was arrested after his cousin’s husband, Robert Carter, told police that Graves had assisted him in murdering six of Carter’s family members. Despite a lack of physical evidence linking him to the crime and several recantations made by Carter, both before and after Graves was convicted, Graves received the death penalty and remained on death row.

Finally, on October 27, 2010, Graves was exonerated after the case was investigated and revealed that the prosecutor in the case, Charles Sebesta, had engaged in multiple acts of prosecutorial misconduct. After spending 18 years in prison, 12 of which were on death row, Graves became the 12th person to be exonerated from Texas’ death row.

Following the investigation into Graves’ case, it was discovered that Sebesta had misled jurors, manufactured evidence, elicited false testimony, and concealed evidence proving Graves’ innocence. After pressuring Carter to admit that he had committed the crime with Graves, Sebesta failed to present to the defense that Carter had recanted and confessed that he committed the crime alone. Also committing perjury, Sebesta lied about one of the defense witnesses. He told the witness that he was a murder suspect and threatened to prosecute him, which led the witness to refuse to testify.

In January of 2014, Graves filed a complaint against Sebesta, asking the Texas State Bar to hold Sebesta accountable for withholding important evidence that proved his innocence. After finding that Sebesta did engage in prosecutorial misconduct in Graves’ case, the Texas State Bar revoked his law license. Sebesta appealed the ruling, but the State Bar’s board affirmed his disbarment last week.

Sebesta’s disbarment is an accomplishment for those fighting for the wrongfully convicted and the reformation of our criminal justice system.

exoneration,Prosecutorial misconduct, , ,


More Than a Mistake: The Manipulation Inherent in False Confessions

Samantha Adams — January 27, 2015 @ 10:22 AM — Comments (1)

It is difficult to learn that people are convicted for crimes they did not commit. Accepting the existence of wrongful convictions means facing the fact that America’s criminal justice system is not infallible. But we must acknowledge that while our legal system portrays itself as only punishing those who are guilty, there are many weak areas where the innocent can mistakenly slip through the cracks. For example, it is extremely common for eyewitnesses to inadvertently identify an innocent person, as did Jennifer Thompson when she wrongly identified Ronald Cotton as the man who raped her. The jury, strongly influenced by the eyewitness testimony, thus convicts the innocent man. In such a case, neither the jury nor the eyewitness intends to be unjust; they mistakenly believe that they have correctly identified the criminal.

Unfortunately, there are also instances where wrongful convictions are more than a mistake. While some wrongful convictions can be at least partially explained away by human error, other cases show signs of outright manipulation. A strong indicator that some sort of deception or coercion was inherent in the wrongful conviction is the existence of a false confession.

Police interrogations are a common source of manipulation leading to false confessions. In a recent study, psychologists Stephen Porter and Julia Shaw found that not only is it surprisingly easy to create false memories of committing crime, but also that many of the methods that lead to the creation of these false memories are commonly employed in police interrogations as part of the Reid technique. For example, interrogations following the Reid technique are designed to be accusatory and to elicit a confession from the suspect, and often make use of false evidence and social pressures. All of these methods were employed by Porter and Shaw in their study, and contributed to the creation of the participants’ false memories. In other words, police interrogations are not always intended to correctly identify the culprit; rather, the police often assume that the suspect is guilty and do whatever it takes to force a confession out of him or her, including manipulating the suspect’s memory and producing a false confession.

Eddie Joe Lloyd’s case provides an even more straightforwardly deceitful example of how police interrogations can lead to false confessions. Police convinced the mentally ill Lloyd that by incriminating himself in the 1984 murder of a 16-year-old girl, he would influence the real culprit to confess and thus be helping the police solve a crime. Of course, police instead used his confession to implicate Lloyd himself, and he was sentenced to life in prison, which he served until being exonerated with DNA evidence in 2002. It’s clear, then, that the manipulation involved in police interrogations is not harmless. Confessions are extremely powerful evidence that often lead to conviction, and police who use these sorts of coercive strategies to encourage suspects to falsely confess are a major player in wrongful convictions.

Police are not the only ones guilty of manipulative techniques, however. Prosecutors also play a role in encouraging false confessions through the practice of plea bargaining. Judge Jed S. Rakoff has written an informative article about how prosecutor’s offers of a plea bargain can lead innocent people to plead guilty. While it may seem like plea bargains actually offer defendants a good deal, for example, serving life in prison instead of being charged with the death penalty if they simply plead guilty to the crime without a trial, we must remember that these bargains can be a deal with the devil. If an innocent person has been so far implicated in a crime that he or she is forced to go to court, he or she may believe there is no possibility of being proved innocent, and will instead resort to taking whatever scraps the prosecutor throws at them in the form of a plea bargain. The innocent person is then stuck with a charge and prison time, and faces the obstacle of going against his own confession if he ever wants to prove himself innocent. Rakoff notes that an estimated 2 to 8 percent of convicted felons are actually innocent and plead guilty to avoid harsher sentences, and that 10 percent of the Innocence Project’s exonerations had previously plead guilty to their charge. Plea bargains can certainly be a temptation that is hard to avoid.

Too many innocent people are being manipulated to falsely confess and subsequently convicted based on these false confessions. The fact that players in the criminal justice system are actually working in ways to encourage these false confessions is an unfortunate truth that must be recognized in the fight against wrongful convictions.

exoneration,Innocence Project of Florida,judicial,justice,Prosecutorial misconduct,Science, , , ,


Browsing the National Registry of Exonerations

Marianne Salcedo — October 30, 2014 @ 9:29 AM — Comments (0)

The National Registry of Exonerations is an outstanding source of information about exonerations in the United States since 1989. It is searchable, and recently, we took some time to create a short summary of exonerations in the State of Florida.

There have been 50 exonerations listed for Florida, including capital cases, since 1989. Fifteen have been based on new DNA evidence.  Florida leads the nation in exonerations for death penalty cases.

The factors contributing to Florida exonerations range from mistaken witness identification, official misconduct, perjury, false accusation, inadequate legal defense, and false or misleading forensic evidence. By far, the leading factor in Florida cases is perjury of false accusation.

Once you search for the exonerations you wish to examine, links will take you to case summary pages. Here are some examples. Click on the last names to learn more about these cases on the Registry website.

Neely, Todd; Florida; Exonerated 1989; Mistaken Witness ID, Official Misconduct.

Townsend, Jerry; Florida; Exonerated 2001; Mistaken Witness ID, False Confession.

Britt, Cheydrick; Florida; Exonerated 2013; False or Misleading Forensic Evidence, Perjury or False Accusation, Inadequate Legal Defense.

Mr. Britt was exonerated with assistance from the Innocence Project of Florida just last year. In the coming months, we anticipate up to three more exonerations. Stay tuned and take some time to read about all of Florida’s exonerees, many of whom IPF has helped to free, and learn about all of the cases of injustice throughout the United States.

exoneration,Innocence Project of Florida,justice,post-conviction,prison,Prosecutorial misconduct,Science, , , , , , , ,


Michigan Man Exonerated After 17 Years in Prison

Justin Hirsche — September 09, 2014 @ 9:01 AM — Comments (0)

Jaime Lee Peterson was exonerated today after spending 17 years in custody and in a Michigan prison for the rape and murder of a elderly woman that he did not commit. He was serving a life sentence. The cause of his wrongful conviction stems from his false confession during the interrogation process which happened four months after the murder. Despite knowing that DNA testing of the victim’s rape kit excluded Peterson as the rapist, the jury convicted Peterson at a 1998 trial. The prosecutor led the jury to believe that semen found at the crime scene that was, at that time, untestable most likely belonged to Mr. Peterson. Along with his initial confession, this was enough to sentence him to life in prison. New DNA testing was conducted last year at the urging of Mr. Peterson’s new attorneys, the testing sought to prove that the previously untestable DNA belonged to the same person whose DNA was found initially with the rape kit. All of the male DNA  tested in this case was found to match a man named Jason Ryan (who was actually interviewed during the initial investigation).  Ryan was arrested last year for this decades old crime and currently is awaiting trial. Petersen’s case was led by the Michigan Innocence Clinic.

This case is just another one to add to the troubling ever growing list of coerced false confessions. After initially confessing Jaime (who is cognitively impaired) recanted his statements, but that usually does the person in such a situation no good. Roughly a fourth of those exonerated in America falsely confessed to crimes at some point during their interrogation. Jaime is the fourth man in Michigan to be exonerated by DNA evidence.

Compensation,Constitution,exoneration,judicial,justice,legislation,post-conviction,prison,Prosecutorial misconduct,Science, , , , , , , , , , ,


DNA Evidence Clears Two men in 1983 North Carolina Murder Case

Justin Hirsche — September 03, 2014 @ 4:03 PM — Comments (0)

After spending 30 long years in prison, two brothers in North Carolina were exonerated Tuesday by a North Carolina Judge. Henry Lee McCollum and Leon Brown were both released from prison today They had been found guilty of the heinous rape and murder of an 11-year old girl. The two African American men were 15 and 19 at the time of the murder are both considered intellectually disabled. After long hours of unethical interrogation with no lawyer present each separately confessed to the crime, by signing statements written for them by police officers. But when they were sent to trial they recanted all of their statements confessing to the crime. Key evidence was left unaccounted for at the time of the trial. A similar murder had been committed in the same town within a month of the brother’s arrest, and a local man, Roscoe Artis, had confessed to the rape and murder of an 18-year old. Artis lived just a block from where the victim’s body had been found yet he was not seen as a suspect. A cigarette butt found near the vicitim’s body was tested  to see whose DNA would show up on it — there was not a match for either of the exonerees — but their was a match for Roscoe Artis’s DNA. Artis is currently serving a life sentence for his other rape and murder.

Leon Brown was sent away for life and Henry Lee McCollum received the death penalty with no evidence connecting them to the crime, but because they confessed to it under duress they had a huge chunk of their lives stolen. This just furthers the evidence that just because someone confesses to a crime when they are under immense pressure, that does not mean they are guilty of said crime. Roughly 25 percent of those wrongly convicted of crimes have admitted guilt during their initial interrogation, the only way we can stop this cruel treatment is to change the way we interrogate suspects and make sure all interrogations are videotaped. Over the past 23 years there have been over 2,000 exonerations in the United States and with the great news of today we can add two more to that ever growing list.

McCollum and Brown were defended in their search for the truth by Center for Death Penalty Litigation.

Compensation,exoneration,judicial,justice,legislation,policy,prison,Prosecutorial misconduct,Science, , , , , , , , , ,


Hayne and West: Mississippi’s Corrupt Duo

Henry Thompson — February 10, 2014 @ 9:28 AM — Comments (4)

Medical examiners often play an integral role in criminal cases when they are called as an expert witnesses to testify on the behalf of the prosecution. In most cases, these medical examiners’ opinions are trusted and their testimony often heavily influences whether someone is found guilty or acquitted.

The infamous Dr. Steven Hayne of Mississippi has been regarded as an incompetent and unreliable medical examiner by the medical and legal communities for years now. Even though Hayne has not been a medical examiner since 2008, his legacy continues to wreak havoc on the lives of those whom he testified against.

Hayne began working with dentist Michael West, his frequent collaborator, in 1987 when he began performing autopsies in Mississippi. Despite lacking sufficient credentials, Hayne monopolized the autopsies performed in Mississippi, claiming he was completing 1200 to 1500 autopsies a year; working 365 days per year, that’s more than 3 autopsies per day. The National Association of Medical Examiners recommends about 250 autopsies per medical examiner per year.

With Hayne backing up West’s testimonies, and vice versa, the two frequently worked together, resulting in several men being sentenced to life in prison. One of these men was Levon Brooks in 1990. Brooks was convicted of raping and murdering 3-year old Courtney Smith in Brooksville, Miss. This occurred after Hayne found bite marks on the girl during the autopsy and called Michael West to take dental molds of several suspects and compare them to the marks found. Just ten days after the murder, Levon Brooks was identified as the abductor by Courtney Smith’s sister and was found to be the perpetrator through a dental mold test performed by West. Brooks was convicted and sentenced to life in prison in 1992.

Again the two collaborated in a strikingly similar case in Mississippi. In this case, a young girl was abducted, raped, and killed. The police focused their search on a friend of the girl’s sister. This man, Kennedy Brewer, was then tried and convicted thanks to another bite mark examination performed by Hayne and West. Brewer was sentenced to death.

One of the first instances in which Michael West used this dental mark examination was in 1989 with the case of Henry Lee Harrison. West used blue ultraviolet light to reveal bite marks on the body which were previously unseen. Just like Steven Hayne, Michael West’s methods have been criticized by many in the past. West and Hayne found that when the two collaborated using the bite mark examination they were very successful.

“He is clearly a sore on the body of forensic science,” says James Starrs, a professor of law and forensic science at George Washington University and publisher of Scientific Sleuthing Review, an industry newsletter. “He is forever going beyond what other scientists are willing or able to say.” – ABA Journal 

In 2001, The Innocence Project was investigating the case of Kennedy Brewer and found DNA evidence that proved he was not the perpetrator. However, authorities initially didn’t find the true criminal and Brewer remained in prison until Albert Johnson, another suspect in both cases, was re-interviewed by law enforcement officials. Johnson admitted to committing the crimes that Brewer and Brooks had been convicted of and the two men were freed in 2008.

Upon this news, Stephen Hayne and Michael West underwent intense scrutiny regarding their practices and methods. Hayne was found to be incompetent and overbearing by his peers and those who he worked with.

 For nearly 20 years, Hayne performed as much as 90 percent of the criminal autopsies in Mississippi, which by his own account could approach 1,800 autopsies per year. Over the last two years, The Huffington Post has reported on several other cases in which Hayne and his frequent collaborator Michael West have given questionable testimony or issued forensics reports that led to a wrongful arrest — most recently in January, with an investigation into the 1997 murder of 39-year-old Kathy Mabry.The Huffington Post

Although the media and the general public contended that Stephen Hayne and his partner were incompetent, Hayne still maintained a large following of supporters in his home state. This is only evident through the fact that he was allowed to continue practicing.

In 2002, Jeffery Havard was convicted of killing his girlfriend’s infant child. Hayne was an expert witness during the case of Mr. Havard, despite his own recent credibility issues. Hayne contended that Havard had sexually abused the child and then subsequently killed the child through violent shaking. Mr. Havard was sentenced to death even though he argued that the child had just slipped from his hands and hit her head.

 “Once Havard was convicted, his case was kicked up to the Mississippi Capital Post Conviction Office, a well-funded state legal defense agency that was started after several federal court decisions pretty much demanded it. That office hired former Alabama State Medical Examiner Jim Lauridson to review Hayne’s autopsy in the Havard case. Lauridson found it lacking.”The Huffington Post

Hayne’s autopsies were often lacking even though they were not reviewed consistently by his medical peers. Hayne’s work as an expert witness did not simply send one man to death row in Mississippi: Jeffery Havard is on death row as well as Devin Bennett, Eddie Lee Howard, and Jimmie Duncan thanks to Hayne and West.

Hayne does not continue to practice as a medical examiner, nor is it likely he will continue to act as an expert witness. He still is called to the stand to review and comment on postconviction cases in which he originally performed autopsies.  Hayne, and those who abuse their power within the justice system for their own gain, must be rooted out and expelled if we are to have a justice system that can be trusted to produce reliable outcomes.

justice,post-conviction,Prosecutorial misconduct,Science, , , , , , , , , , ,


Newly Established Prosecutorial Misconduct Database Online

Henry Thompson — January 14, 2014 @ 1:01 PM — Comments (2)

Prosecutorial misconduct has been a contributing factor in 42% of wrongful conviction cases. Recently it has seen many outspoken critics.  In a recent article by The New York Times the issue was raised by its editors wherein they make mention of the fact that prosecutors are obliged to bring to the court any exculpatory evidence that could change the verdict pursuant to the 1963 Supreme Court ruling on Brady v. Maryland. This obligation is counter-intuitive for prosecutors, because they are primarily striving to bring justice to the community through convictions.

The Editorial Board of the New York Times wrote “The lack of professional consequences for failing to disclose exculpatory evidence only makes the breach of duty more likely. As Judge Kozinski wrote, “Some prosecutors don’t care about Brady because courts don’t make them care.”  Others have also recently bemoaned the acceptable nature of frequent prosecutorial misconduct and have shamed judges for not upholding the obligations of Brady v. Maryland.

Registry-Logo-300x300In response to this outcry, the Center for Prosecutor Integrity began tracking and monitoring prosecutorial integrity around the country and they have created a registry of cases of prosecutorial misconduct.  “The CPI Registry of Prosecutorial Misconduct enables policymakers, researchers, and others to identify common types of misconduct, assess trends, and compare jurisdictions.” This new registry was opened to the public during the first week of January 2014. It is searchable by a number of identifying details like crime, state, type of trial (federal or not), prosecutor name, case name, as well as finding.

The Registry of Prosecutorial Misconduct defines prosecutorial misconduct “as a violation of a code of professional ethics or pertinent law, or other conduct that prejudices the administration of justice, whether intentional or inadvertent. Inclusion of a case in the Registry is based on a finding of prosecutorial misconduct by a trial court, appellate court, supreme court, or legal disciplinary body.”

Not only did the Center for Prosecutor Integrity create a highly usable and friendly database for the public to use but they have also created a graph to accompany the newly founded database. The graph denotes that 84 of the cases found in the database of 200 were a result of pretrial Brady violations on behalf of the prosecutors. It can be found here. This database is one of the first steps in determining the larger picture of prosecutorial misconduct and holding those responsible accountable for abusing the public trust. The CPI database can be found here.

exoneration,Innocence Project of Florida,justice,Prosecutorial misconduct, , , , , , ,


The Number of Exonerations Continues to Grow

Henry Thompson — October 25, 2013 @ 11:43 AM — Comments (0)

As of October 2013 the number of exonerations documented in the United States was 1,228.

Exonerations nationwide are documented in The National Registry of Exonerations, which is a joint project of the Michigan Law School and Northwestern University School of Law. The registry is a searchable and detailed database of information about those who have been exonerated from prison in the United States.

National-Registry-of-ExonerationsSamuel R. Gross, law professor at the University of Michigan School of Law , and Rob Warden, executive director of The Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern School of Law, began reviewing data on exonerations in the United States in 1989.

In 2012, with the help of law student Michael Shaffer and many other volunteers, they published a comprehensive review of exonerations on a national scale and launched the website for the National Registry of Exonerations.

The report contains extensive research data from 1989 to 2012. The three help to define and clarify exonerations and the processes behind them. The report also significantly explained in large detail reasons for wrongful convictions. Here are some excerpts from the inaugural report from The National Registry of Exonerations.

“DNA exonerations also take longer than non-DNA exonerations; the median time from conviction is 14.9 years compared to 7.8 years. This is true for homicide cases, where the median time is 15 years with DNA and 11.9 years without; for sexual assault cases, where the comparable numbers are 14.6 years and 7.1 years; and for child sex abuse exonerations, where the median times are 17 years with DNA and 5.9 without DNA.”

“The 873 exonerations in the Registry  come from 43 states, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 19 federal districts, and the military. They are very unevenly distributed by state, and especially when broke down by county. This suggests we are missing many cases – both innocent defendants from jurisdictions where exonerations are vanishingly rare, and exonerated defendants whose cases have received little or no public attention.”

Along with detailing information regarding DNA testing for exonerations and national data, Gross and Ward explain the types of situations that may lead to wrongful incarceration. These situations are many and varied though common themes tie them together. Some of the most egregious wrongful convictions stem from official misconduct on behalf of law enforcement or the courts.

“The range of misconduct is very large. It includes flagrantly abusive investigative practices that produce the types of false evidence we have discussed: committing or procuring perjury; torture; threats or other highly coercive interrogations; threatening or lying to eyewitnesses; forensic fraud. At the far end, it includes framing innocent suspects for crimes that never occurred. The most common serious form of official misconduct is concealing exculpatory evidence from the defendant and the court.”

The average number of exonerations has grown by about 220 cases per year. The website is an invaluable resource that is intuitively designed and makes searching out exonerees a simple task. The website allows the user to search using name, exoneration date, contributing factors to exoneration, location, and status. The website also provides relatively short biographies of those profiled and their history regarding their exoneration.

 You can find information about the Registry online and a copy of the inaugural exonerations report created by Gross and Warden can be found here.

exoneration,Innocence Project of Florida,judicial,justice,post-conviction,Prosecutorial misconduct, , , , , , , , , , , ,

© Copyright Innocence Project of Florida, Inc. This web site is supported in part by grants from The Florida Bar Foundation.