- Exoneree Clarence Harrison makes music with his new album “Life Sentence.”
- Pennsylvania Innocence Project client Han Tak Lee walks free in Pennsylvania on Friday after his arson conviction is thrown out by a federal judge
- After long battle, California Innocence Project client Timothy Atkins declared factually innocent and to receive state compensation for his wrongful conviction
- Steve Drizin writes about the joint effort of Northwestern U and U Michigan to exonerate Jamie Lee Peterson
- Mississippi Innocence Project writes about the potentially false testimony in a number of cases by medical examiner Steven Hayne
- Original detectives back bid by Michigan Innocence Clinic to get new trial for Jeff Titus
- Wisconsin Innocence Project seeks DNA testing in 1982 murder case
Hysteria often breeds wrongful convictions. The anti-communist hysteria of the 1950s McCarthy era undoubtedly led to some miscarriages of justice, and Miriam Moskowitz says her espionage conviction was one of them. Now 98, Moskowitz says she wants to clear her name while she still has time, and has asked a federal judge to throw out her 1950 conviction. You can read about the case here.
Today, in Hinton v. Alabama, the U.S. Supreme Court found the trial attorney’s failure to request funding for a sufficient expert to challenge the State’s ballistics experts constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. Opinion here.
- In Wisconsin, the governor says he’ll issue no “innocence pardons” because it is too hard to pick and choose who deserves attention and who doesn’t
- Why is a Texas prosecutor still practicing law after having been found to have committed egregious misconduct to wrongfully convict Anthony Graves?
- Philly police to implement sweeping interrogation reforms January 1, 2014
- Virginia man Jonathan Montgomery says exoneration is “best Christmas present ever.“
- Details about the Little Rascals Daycare case in North Carolina, another of the alleged daycare hysteria wrongful conviction cases
- Nora Wall, wrongfully convicted Irish nun, in talks with Irish government about compensation
- Connecticut federal judge finds that Scott Lewis was wrongfully convicted as a result of Brady violations
- Exoneree says arrestee names should remain confidential
- Murder conviction tossed in Georgia
- An epidemic of prosecutor misconduct
- Exoneree Fernando Bermudez to kick off ‘Dilemmas of Justice’ lecture series Sept. 24th
- On Monday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling that freed a California man who was wrongfully convicted in 1999 of being in possession of a concealed knife under California’s Three Strikes Law. Daniel Larsen was convicted based largely on eyewitness identification. Two officers testified that they saw Larsen throw a knife under a car located in the parking lot of the Golden Apple Bar in Los Angeles. Because he had prior felony convictions, Larson was sentenced to serve 28 years to life in prison. Larsen spent nearly 14 years in prison before his conviction was reversed by a U. S. District Court judge in 2010 after the California Innocence Project, which began representing Larson in 2002, found witnesses who testified seeing a different man holding the knife.
Professor Stephanie Roberts Hartung has posted the above-titled article on SSRN. Download here. This article is on an important issue that causes serious problems for innocent habeas petitioners. The abstract states:
The DNA exoneration data stemming from the Innocence Movement exposes a harsh reality in our criminal justice system: existing post-conviction review procedures fail to accurately identify and remedy wrongful convictions of the innocent. While the layers of review available upon conviction are seemingly exhaustive, in fact, the factually innocent prisoner is confronted with little more than a façade of protection. At the federal habeas stage, several provisions of the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act [AEDPA] operate to foreclose viable claims of innocence. Further, the federal courts entertain second or successive habeas petitions in a piecemeal fashion, if they do so at all. This “piecemeal approach” negatively impacts prisoners raising claims of factual innocence, in light of their typically pro se status and incarceration. In reviewing each successive habeas petition in isolation, without regard to previous claims, the courts often miss the forest for the trees, allowing innocent prisoners to remain in custody.
This Article discusses the piecemeal problem inherent in federal habeas review procedures, provides a case illustration, and advocates for a broader reading of the “evidence as a whole” language in AEDPA’s 28 U.S.C. Section 2244(b)(2). This broader interpretation, already adopted by the Fourth Circuit, would allow courts to review a petitioner’s successive habeas claims in the aggregate, and thus, more readily identify cognizable claims of factual innocence. This Article contributes to the ongoing debate as to how the competing post-conviction interests of finality and fairness should be recalibrated in light of the DNA exoneration data brought forth by the Innocence Movement.