Justin Brooks
Professor, California Western School of Law; Director,
California Innocence ProjectOrder his book
Wrongful Convictions Cases & Materials 2d ed. here
Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore
Daniel Ehighalua
Nigerian Barrister
Associate Professor of Justice Studies, Montclair University
Carey D. Hoffman
Director of Digital Communications,
Ohio Innocence Project@OIPCommunicati1
Shiyuan Huang
Associate Professor, Shandong University Law School; Visiting Scholar, University of Cincinnati College of Law
Professor of Criminology, Law & Society and Sociology, University of California-Irvine
Phil Locke
Science and Technology Advisor, Ohio Innocence Project and Duke Law Wrongful Convictions Clinic
Dr. Carole McCartney
Reader in Law, Faculty of Business and Law, Northumbria University
Nancy Petro
Author and Advocate
Order her book
False Justice here
Professor, Faculty of Law, Konan University Innocence Project Japan
Professor, Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice, Northern Arizona University; Executive Director, Arizona Innocence Project
Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, University of Oslo, Norway
Author and Private Investigator
Order his book
Presumed Guilty here
Ohio governor introduces new budget that, if passed, would undercut exoneree compensation law
Order Here
Wrongful Convictions Blog 
The proposal, IMLO is much worse than “no sense”.
A more fitting word would be obscene.
What if a prisoner were cleared of a serious felony through DNA, yet had an underlying misdemeanor wrongful conviction that could not be cleared.
DJB, AMOACDL, TFMANOACDL
========================
“A former inmate, found to have been wrongfully convicted and imprisoned, would be disqualified if he or she had an unrelated conviction on a felony or a “misdemeanor offense of violence” in the previous 10 years.”
“This makes no sense,” said Mark Godsey, director of the Ohio Innocence Project at the University of Cincinnati,
Legislative Service Commission -66, 67- H.B. 487
COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO (CLA)
Wrongful imprisonment
Provides that a determination that a person is a wrongfully imprisoned individual must be made in a separate civil action in the court of common pleas associated with the person’s conviction and requires the prosecuting attorney to defend those civil actions.
Removes “an error in procedure that resulted in the individual’s release” from the possible criteria a person must satisfy to be considered a wrongfully imprisoned individual.
Provides that if the individual at the time of the wrongful imprisonment was serving concurrent sentences on other convictions that were not vacated, dismissed, or reversed on appeal, then the individual is not eligible for any portion of wrongful imprisonment that occurred during such a concurrent sentence.
Provides that in order for a wrongfully imprisoned individual to be eligible to recover a sum of money for the wrongful imprisonment, the individual cannot have been convicted of a felony, other than the felony that is the subject of the civil action, or a misdemeanor offense of violence within ten years prior to the filing of the civil action to be declared a wrongfully imprisoned individual or be convicted of a felony during the pendency of that action or the civil action in the Court of Claims.
Allows a prosecuting attorney or the Attorney General, or their assistants, to inspect sealed conviction and bail forfeiture records for the purpose of defending a civil action to determine if a person is a wrongfully imprisoned individual.
Removes a requirement that the court that determines that a person is a wrongfully imprisoned individual orally inform the individual that the individual has the right to have counsel of that individual’s own choice in the civil action in the Court of Claims to recover damages from the state and the specific statement that a
wrongfully imprisoned individual has the right to have counsel of the individual’s own choice.