Neil Gordon stories from The Center for Public Integrity

Neil Gordon stories from The Center for Public Integrity 2013-05-24T04:52:54-04:00 http://www.publicintegrity.org/node/5529/rss Actual innocence http://www.publicintegrity.org/node/5531

Exonerated defendants whose cases involved prosecutorial misconduct

Actual innocence Law_Crime;Year of birth missing;Criminal procedure;DNA profiling;Overturned convictions in the United States;Exoneration;Rolando Cruz case 2011-11-28T14:40:46-05:00 2003-06-26T00:00:00-04:00 <p>Actual innocence cases in which courts found prosecutorial misconduct</p><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Randall Dale Adams</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Texas – Dallas County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1977: convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death <br>1980: death sentence overturned; sentence commuted to life imprisonment <br>1988: key witness recanted his trial testimony and attested to Adams' innocence <br>1989: conviction overturned; Adams released from prison</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1989, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overturned Adams' conviction, holding that prosecutor Douglas D. Mulder withheld a statement a witness gave to the police that cast doubt on her credibility and allowed her to give perjured testimony. Further, the court found that after Adams' attorney discovered the statement, Mulder falsely told the court that he did not know the witness' whereabouts.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>768 S.W.2d 281; 577 S.W.2d 717</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Kirk Bloodsworth</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Maryland – Baltimore County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1985: convicted of first-degree murder, first-degree rape and first-degree sexual offense; sentenced to death <br>1986: conviction overturned because of a Brady violation <br>1987: reconvicted <br>1993: DNA exoneration; released from prison and pardoned</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1986, the Maryland Court of Appeals overturned Bloodsworth's conviction because prosecutors Robert Lazzaro and Ann Brobst withheld evidence pertaining to another possible suspect.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>512 A.2d 1056</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Clarence Brandley</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Texas – Montgomery County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1981: convicted of capital murder <br>1986: a witness tells authorities another man confessed to the crime <br>1989: conviction overturned <br>1990: released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1989, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overturned Brandley's conviction, finding that police and prosecutors, including James Keeshan, failed to investigate leads pertaining to other suspects, suppressed evidence placing other suspects at crime scene at time of crime, failed to call a witness who didn't support the state's case, allowed the perjured testimony of a witness to go uncorrected, and failed to notify Brandley that another man later confessed to the crime.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>781 S.W.2d 886; 691 S.W.2d 699</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Paris Carriger</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Arizona – Maricopa County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1978: convicted of robbery and murder <br>1987 and 1991: state's key witness confessed to the crime <br>1997: conviction overturned <br>1999: released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1997, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted Carriger a new trial because the prosecutor, Richard Strohm, failed to disclose information that could have undermined the key witness' credibility.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>692 P.2d 991</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Kerry Max Cook</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Texas – Smith County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1978: convicted of capital murder <br>1991: conviction overturned due to the erroneous admission of psychiatric testimony <br>1994: retried and convicted <br>1996: conviction overturned <br>1999: pled to a lesser charge; DNA exoneration</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1996, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overturned Cook's conviction because the prosecutors, including A. D. Clark, Michael Thompson and David Dobbs, withheld and/or lied about evidence on a variety of matters concerning Cook's guilt and the credibility of state witnesses and attempted to interview Cook without the knowledge or consent of his lawyer. The court's opinion also notes that a state expert witness admitted that Clark pressured him to present false and misleading testimony.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>940 S.W.2d 623; 741 S.W.2d 928</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Rolando Cruz and Alejandro Hernandez</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Illinois – DuPage County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1985: convicted of kidnapping, rape and murder; another man confessed <br>1988: convictions overturned <br>1990: Cruz reconvicted <br>1991: Hernandez reconvicted <br>1994: Cruz conviction overturned <br>1995: Hernandez conviction overturned; DNA exoneration; Cruz acquitted at third trial; charges against Hernandez dismissed <br>2000: Cruz, Hernandez and a third defendant prosecuted for the same crime won $3.5 million settlement from county</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>Cruz's first conviction was overturned because of prosecutor Thomas Knight's improper use of co-defendants' statements at trial. Cruz's second conviction was overturned in part because prosecutor Robert Kilander improperly impeached a witness. In 1996, prosecutors Knight, Kilander and Patrick King, along with four sheriff's detectives, were criminally charged with conspiring to convict Cruz and Hernandez by fabricating evidence and withholding exculpatory evidence. All were acquitted in 1999.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>521 N.E.2d 18; 1992 Ill. Lexis 221; 643 N.E.2d 636</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Henry Arthur Drake</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td><p><st1:country-region>Georgia</st1:country-region> – Madison County</p></td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1976: convicted of murder and armed robbery; sentenced to death on the murder charge <br>1981: state's key witness, the co-defendant, admitted he lied at Drake's trial and that he, not Drake, was responsible for the murder <br>1985: conviction overturned <br>1987: reconvicted; paroled later that year</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In separate trials of Drake and the co-defendant, prosecutor Bryant Huff used two different theories as to who was the murderer. In 1985, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed Drake's death sentence because of Huff's improper remarks during the sentencing phase of trial.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>247 S.E.2d 57</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Ella Mae Ellison</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Massachusetts – Suffolk County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1974: convicted of murder and armed robbery <br>1976: the two key witnesses recanted their trial testimony and claimed Ellison was innocent <br>1978: convictions overturned; released; all charges dropped</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1978, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts overturned Ellison's convictions because the prosecutor withheld evidence that could have exonerated Ellison</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>379 N.E.2d 560</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Michael Ray Graham and Albert Ronnie Burrell</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Louisiana – Union Parish</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1987: convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death in separate trials <br>2000: charges dismissed; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In granting a new trial for Graham in March 2000, a judge ruled that prosecutor Dan Grady had failed to disclose several pieces of exculpatory evidence. The judge also noted that Grady later provided an affidavit in which he admitted the case against Graham and Burrell was so weak it should not have been brought to the grand jury.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>561 So.2d 692 (Burrell)</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Ricky Hammond</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Connecticut – Hartford-New Britain</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1987: kidnapping and sexual assault; Hammond became a suspect <br>1989: DNA and blood test exoneration <br>1990: convicted <br>1992: conviction overturned; new trial granted; was subsequently retried and acquitted</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>Despite pre-trial biological tests that exonerated Hammond, prosecutor John Malone at trial claimed the evidence had been contaminated, a claim the appellate court deemed highly improbable. However, the state at that time had other evidence that could have been – but was not – tested. The court also ruled that some of Malone comments during closing argument were improper but not prejudicial enough to separately require reversal.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>604 A.2d 793</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Terry Harrington</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Iowa – Pottawattamie County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1978: convicted of first-degree murder <br>2000: "Brain Fingerprinting" test exoneration <br>2003: conviction overturned; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In overturning Harrington's conviction in 2003, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that several police reports pointing to another suspect were not turned over and noted that a witness testified at a post-conviction hearing that he lied at Harrington's trial because police and prosecutors pressured him. In an earlier appeal, the court dismissed Harrington's claims that prosecutor Joseph Hrvol intimidated a defense witness, suborned the perjury of a state witness and committed improprieties in his dealings with other witnesses.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>284 N.W.2d 244; 659 N.W.2d 509</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>J. L. Ivey, Jr.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>New York – Erie County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1976: convicted of second-degree murder and first-degree robbery <br>1981: conviction overturned <br>1982: retried and acquitted; released <br>1985: won a judgment against the state for wrongful conviction and imprisonment</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>The appellate court overturned Ivey's conviction because prosecutor Albert Ranni committed "numerous and repeated acts of improper and prejudicial conduct" at Ivey's trial, including attempting to offer into evidence misleading composite sketches in defiance of the court's rulings and making improper remarks to jury. In Ivey's wrongful conviction and imprisonment suit, the court found that Ivey had proven his innocence by clear and convincing evidence.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>443 N.Y.S.2d 452</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Lesly Jean</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>North Carolina – Onslow County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1982: convicted of first-degree sexual offense and first-degree rape <br>1991: conviction overturned; charges dropped; released <br>2001: DNA exoneration; pardoned; awarded compensation from state</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1991, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit overturned Jean's conviction because the police and/or prosecutors failed to disclose evidence pertaining to the hypnosis of a key witness and the victim. Two judges dissented from the North Carolina Supreme Court's affirmance of Jean's conviction in 1984, finding that prosecutor Walter Vatcher's cross-examination of Jean was improper.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>311 S.E.2d 266</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Verneal Jimerson</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Illinois – Cook County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1978: indicted on charges arising from a double murder; the charges were dismissed a month later because the key witness recanted her grand jury testimony <br>1984: re-indicted on charges of murder <br>1985: convicted <br>1995: conviction overturned <br>1996: DNA exoneration; another man confessed; Jimerson and three others convicted of the same crimes released from prison <br>1999: The four receive $36 million from the state</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1995, the Supreme Court of Illinois overturned Jimerson's convictions because the prosecutor, Scott Arthur, allowed the perjured testimony of the state's key witness to stand uncorrected.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>652 N.E.2d 278</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Ray Krone</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Arizona – Maricopa County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1992: convicted of first-degree murder and kidnapping <br>1995: conviction overturned <br>1996: retried and convicted <br>2002: DNA exoneration; released; charges dismissed</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td><p>In 1995, the Arizona Supreme Court ordered a new trial because prosecutor Noel Levy did not turn over a crucial piece of evidence – a videotape an expert witness was preparing to use during his testimony – until the eve of trial.</p></td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>897 P.2d 621</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Steven Paul Linscott</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Illinois – Cook County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1982: convicted of murder; acquitted of rape <br>1985: conviction overturned due to insufficient evidence <br>1986: conviction reinstated; case remanded <br>1987: conviction overturned due to prosecutorial misconduct <br>1991: case remanded for new trial <br>1992: DNA exoneration; charges dropped before retrial <br>2002: pardoned</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>The appellate courts overturned Linscott's conviction because the prosecutor made several misleading and improper statements regarding the forensic evidence.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>566 N.E.2d 1355</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Ronnie Marshall and Robert Spurlock</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Tennessee – Sumner County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1990: convicted of first-degree murder at separate trials <br>1992: Marshall's conviction overturned <br>1993: Spurlock's conviction overturned <br>1995: Spurlock retried and convicted; Marshall plea bargained for a reduced sentence <br>1995-1996: the real killer confessed <br>1996: convictions vacated; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals overturned Marshall's conviction because prosecutors Lawrence Ray Whitley and Jerry Kitchen failed to provide witness statements that pointed to other suspects A year later, the court overturned Spurlock's conviction because Whitley and Kitchen failed to provide exculpatory witness statements, failed to correct the false testimony given by prosecution witnesses and used false evidence.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>845 S.W.2d 228 (Marshall); 874 S.W.2d 602 (Spurlock)</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Walter McMillian</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Alabama – Monroe County (tried in Baldwin County)</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1988: convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death <br>1988-1992: all three witnesses recanted <br>1993: conviction overturned; released; charges dismissed</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals in 1993 ruled prosecutors did not disclose exculpatory evidence and reversed his conviction and death sentence.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Ruben Montalvo and Jose Morales</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>New York – Bronx County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1988: convicted of murder <br>2000: new evidence exoneration <br>2001: convictions vacated; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>A federal district court criticized the Bronx District Attorney office's handling of the case. Leads pointing to other suspects, including repeated confessions by another man, were insufficiently investigated or ignored. Evidence that could have helped both men was either withheld or produced in redacted form. Trial prosecutor Allen Karen did not disclose the key witness' criminal history or correct her inaccurate testimony about drug use and improperly questioned a defense witness.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Charles Munsey</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>North Carolina – Wilkes County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1996: convicted of murder; another man confessed <br>1999: conviction overturned; new trial granted</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In May 1999, the court ordered a new trial for Munsey because, among other errors, District Attorney Randy Lyon withheld evidence that would have cast doubt on the key witness' claim that Munsey confessed to him in prison.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Ellen Reasonover</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Missouri – St. Louis County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1983: convicted of capital murder <br>1996: discovery of exculpatory evidence <br>1999: conviction overturned; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>Prosecutor Steven Goldman did not disclose exculpatory tape-recorded jailhouse conversations and other evidence that undercut the credibility of two key witnesses and failed to correct one witness' false testimony.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>714 S.W.2d 706</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>James Joseph Richardson</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Florida – Lee County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1968: convicted of murder <br>1988: someone else confessed <br>1989: released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1989, then-Dade County State's Attorney Janet Reno, appointed to re-investigate Richardson's case, concluded that the prosecutors and sheriff framed him by withholding exculpatory evidence, using perjured testimony and ignoring a suspect who later confessed she alone committed the crime.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>247 So.2d 296</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>James E. Richardson, Jr.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>West Virginia – Kanawha County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1989: convicted of rape, murder and arson <br>1996: conviction overturned <br>1998: DNA exoneration <br>1999: charges dropped; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In September 1996, a Kanawha circuit judge overturned Richardson's conviction based on allegations that state police chemist Fred Zain fabricated evidence and that prosecutors withheld exculpatory evidence.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Edward Ryder</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Pennsylvania – Philadelphia County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1974: convicted of first-degree murder and conspiracy <br>1991: discovery of new exculpatory evidence <br>1993: sentence commuted; paroled <br>1995: discovery of long-withheld exculpatory evidence <br>1996: conviction overturned</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>For more than twenty years, prosecutors withheld several exculpatory statements taken by police. Despite the emergence of evidence in 1991 casting considerable doubt on Ryder's guilt, the Philadelphia District Attorney's office refused to re-examine his case.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>31 Phila. 112</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Terry W. Seaton</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>New Mexico – Lea County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1973: convicted of first-degree murder <br>1979: released after new evidence cast strong doubt on his guilt <br>1981: awarded $150,000 in a wrongful arrest suit</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>On appeal, Seaton challenged several comments made by the two prosecutors at his trial. The court held that one comment was an "irresponsible" remark regarding Seaton's credibility and another misstated the evidence, but neither these nor the other challenged comments constituted prejudicial error. In 1979, a district court judge granted Seaton a new trial because the prosecution had suppressed evidence pointing to another suspect.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>525 P.2d 858</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Frank Lee Smith</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Florida – Broward County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1985: convicted of first-degree murder, sexual battery and burglary with an assault <br>2000: died in prison; DNA exoneration later that year</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1987, the Supreme Court of Florida ruled that the prosecution's submitting a new witness list on the day of trial did not constitute a discovery violation. The court also rejected Smith's claim that the prosecutor coached a witness outside the courtroom during the trial. In 1990, the court rejected Smith's claim that the prosecutor made inappropriate "victim impact" comments during trial but ordered a hearing to evaluate new evidence that a recanting witness might have been pressured by police and prosecutors to falsely implicate Smith. In 1998, after Smith was denied post-conviction relief, Smith appealed and the state Supreme Court remanded for another hearing because prosecutor Paul Zacks had engaged in improper ex parte communications with the judge presiding over the hearing while the judge was preparing his order. Smith was allowed to re-argue his new evidence claims, but the trial court once again denied relief.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>515 So.2d 182; 565 So.2d 1293; 708 So.2d 253</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Jerry Watkins</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Indiana – Hancock County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1986: convicted of murder <br>1993: DNA exoneration <br>2000: conviction overturned; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 2000, a federal district court found that the prosecutor withheld exculpatory evidence.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Robert Wilkinson</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Pennsylvania – Philadelphia County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1976: convicted of murder; released later in year after being exonerated by new evidence <br>1977: reindicted; indictments dismissed three months later</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>A federal court ruled prosecutor David Berman ignored, withheld and/or destroyed exculpatory evidence. In dismissing Wilkinson's later indictment, the court ruled the prosecution was being maintained in bad faith.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><h4>Actual Innocence Cases in which Courts Rejected or Ruled as "Harmless Error" Allegations of Misconduct</h4><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Mark Diaz Bravo</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>California – Los Angeles County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1990: convicted of rape <br>1990-93: victim recanted several times and Named another man as her attacker <br>1993: DNA exoneration <br>1994: released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>At trial, prosecutor Linda Chilstrom engaged in abrasive, discourteous and insulting conduct and misstated evidence, but the appellate court ruled it harmless error.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>18 Cal. App. 4th 1493</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Ronnie Bullock</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Illinois – Cook County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1984: convicted of deviate sexual assault and aggravated kidnapping <br>1994: DNA exoneration; released; charges dropped</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>The prosecutor made improper closing arguments and withheld evidence regarding another suspected rapist, but the appellate court ruled both actions harmless error.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>507 N.E.2d 44</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Joseph Burrows</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Illinois – Iroquois County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1988: murder/armed robbery <br>1989: convicted <br>1992-1994: two key witnesses recanted their trial testimony and one admitted she alone committed the crime <br>1994: won new trial; released <br>1996: charges dropped</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>The Supreme Court of Illinois upheld Burrows' conviction in 1992, rejecting his claims of pre-trial and trial prosecutorial misconduct. In 1996, the court affirmed the granting of a new trial for Burrows on the ground that two key witnesses recanted their testimony. The court noted that one of the witnesses testified at a post-conviction hearing he recanted a statement that might have helped Burrows because of prosecutor Tony Brasel's threats.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>592 N.E.2d 997</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Gary Dotson</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Illinois – Cook County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1979: convicted of rape and aggravated kidnapping <br>1985: victim admitted she fabricated rape claim; sentence commuted to time served <br>1987: conviction affirmed <br>1988: DNA exoneration <br>1989: conviction overturned</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>The appellate court ruled that the prosecutor's conduct during Dotson's trial, which the trial judge censured at one point, was harmless error.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>424 N.E.2d 1319</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Michael Evans and Paul Terry</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Illinois – Cook County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1977: tried jointly; convicted of murder, aggravated kidnapping, rape, deviate sexual assault, and indecent liberties with a child <br>2001 & 2003: DNA exoneration</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>On direct appeal in 1979, the court ruled that some of the prosecutor's comments during closing argument were improper but harmless error. The court noted that Evans had previously been tried and convicted but was granted a new trial on the basis that the state had improperly withheld exculpatory evidence.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>399 N.E.2d 1333</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Charles I. Fain</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Idaho – Canyon County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1983: convicted of first-degree murder, lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor and first-degree kidnapping <br>2001: DNA exoneration; conviction overturned; charges dismissed; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1989, the Supreme Court of Idaho affirmed his conviction, finding that the state's failure to preserve swabs of the victim's bodily fluid did not deprive him of a fair trial.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Anthony Michael Green</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Ohio – Cuyahoga County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1988: convicted of rape and aggravated robbery <br>2001: DNA exoneration; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>The appellate court, while recognizing that prosecutor Timothy McGinty made some "intemperate" comments during closing argument, nonetheless ruled them harmless error.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>585 N.E.2d 990</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Larry Holdren</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>West Virginia – Kanawha County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1984: convicted of sexual assault <br>1999: DNA exoneration; conviction overturned; released <br>2000: charges dismissed</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In his federal habeas appeal, the court rejected his claim that the prosecutor committed misconduct at trial by eliciting improper testimony and making improper closing arguments.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Joe C. Jones</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Kansas – Shawnee County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1986: convicted of aggravated kidnapping, rape and aggravated assault <br>1991: DNA exoneration <br>1992: conviction overturned; charges dismissed; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1989, the Kansas Supreme Court ruled the prosecution's failure to turn over statements Jones made to the police did not deprive him of a fair trial.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>771 P.2d 73</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Ronald Jones</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Illinois – Cook County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1989: convicted of murder and aggravated sexual <br>1997: DNA exoneration <br>1999: charges dropped</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>On appeal, Jones challenged comments the prosecutor made at trial. Although some of the prosecutor's comments were deemed slightly inaccurate and/or improper,the appellate court ruled them harmless error and affirmed the conviction.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>620 N.E.2d 325</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Kerry Kotler</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>New York – Suffolk County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1981: convicted of rape, robbery and burglary <br>1990: DNA exoneration <br>1992: conviction vacated; charges dismissed; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>Reviewing courts either dismissed or did not directly address Kotler's various claims of prosecutorial misconduct. In 1996, Kotler was arraigned on charges arising from a 1995 sexual assault. He was subsequently convicted.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Carlos Lavernia</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Texas – Travis County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1985: convicted on charges of aggravated rape <br>2000: DNA exoneration; conviction overturned</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In his federal habeas appeal, Lavernia alleged that during closing argument, the prosecutor impermissibly commented on his failure to testify. The court did not agree and denied habeas relief.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Larry Mayes</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Indiana – Lake County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1982: convicted of rape, robbery and unlawful deviate conduct <br>2001: DNA exoneration; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>On appeal, Mayes unsuccessfully argued that the prosecutor made impermissible comments about his failure to testify.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>467 N.E.2d 1189</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>James Newsome</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Illinois – Cook County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1980: convicted of armed robbery, armed violence and murder <br>1994: new evidence exoneration; conviction overturned <br>1995: charges dropped; released; pardoned <br>1997: awarded $140,000 by state <br>2001: won $15 million in a civil suit against the Chicago police</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In his 1982 appeal, the court rejected Newsome's claims that the prosecutor deprived him of a fair trial by excluding blacks from the jury and by misstating the evidence during rebuttal argument.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Marlon Passley</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Massachusetts – Suffolk County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1996: convicted of murder and assault <br>1999: new evidence exoneration; released <br>2000: conviction overturned</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>The appellate court held that part of prosecutor Leslie O'Brien's closing argument, while not an entirely accurate recounting of the evidence, was not reversible error. The court also found no error in the way O'Brien examined defense witnesses.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>705 N.E.2d 269</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Jeffrey Todd Pierce</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Oklahoma – Oklahoma County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1986: convicted of rape, burglary, sodomy and assault with a dangerous weapon <br>2001: DNA exoneration; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>On direct appeal in 1990, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that while the prosecutor made "unnecessary" comments at one point during trial, this did not amount to encouraging a state's witness to give improper testimony. The court also found that the forensic reports the state turned over before trial satisfied their discovery obligations. After he was exonerated, Pierce filed a civil suit claiming Oklahoma District Attorney Robert Macy conspired with police chemist Joyce Gilchrist to use false evidence to convict him.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>786 P.2d 1255</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Fredric Karl Saecker</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Wisconsin – Buffalo County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1990: convicted of second-degree sexual assault, burglary and kidnapping <br>1995: new trial granted after DNA testing exonerated him <br>1996: charges dropped; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1991, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals rejected Saecker's claim that the prosecutor failed to turn over exculpatory evidence.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>466 N.W.2d 911</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Yusef Salaam, Kevin Richardson, Antron McCray, Raymond Santana and Kharey Wise</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>New York – New York County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1989-1990: all were convicted on various counts, including rape, robbery and assault <br>1997: Salaam paroled <br>2002: another man confessed; DNA exoneration; all convictions vacated and indictments dismissed</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1993, the New York Court of Appeals upheld Salaam's conviction; however, in a separate dissenting opinion, Judge Vito Titone criticized the way prosecutor Linda Fairstein kept Salaam's family and friends away while police questioned him. The crime for which the five were convicted is known as the "Central Park jogger attack."</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Walter Smith</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Ohio – Franklin County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1986: convicted of rape, kidnapping, aggravated burglary and robbery <br>1996: DNA exoneration; released <br>2001: awarded nearly $250,000 for wrongful imprisonment</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1988, the Ohio Court of Appeals rejected Smith's claims that the prosecutor withheld exculpatory evidence, improperly cross-examined him, and made prejudicial comments in closing argument</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>1988 Ohio App. Lexis 3032</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Steven L. Toney</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Missouri – St. Louis County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1982: convicted of forcible rape and sodomy <br>1996: DNA exoneration; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1984, the Missouri Court of Appeals rejected Toney's claims that the prosecutor made an improper statement while examining a witness, impermissibly amended the charging document and did not properly disclose a state rebuttal witness. In 1996, a federal appeals court ruled that the prosecutor's use of a surprise rebuttal witness was not a violation of Toney's rights.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Nathaniel Walker</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>New Jersey – Union County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1976: convicted of kidnapping, rape and sodomy <br>1986: new evidence exoneration; charges dismissed; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>On direct appeal, the New Jersey appellate courts reversed – but later reinstated – his conviction on the issue of whether prosecutor Richard Rodbart made impermissible comments to the jury about Walker's failure to call an alibi witness.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>403 A.2d 1</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Terry Lee Wanzer</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Georgia – Clayton County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1973: convicted of rape and aggravated sodomy <br>1981: paroled <br>1991: pardoned <br>1996: awarded $100,000 by the state</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>On appeal in 1974, the Georgia Supreme Court rejected Wanzer's claims that he was deprived of a fair trial when the prosecutor, through the bailiff, made an unauthorized communication with the jury during their deliberations and questioned a defense witness about perjury. The court also ruled the prosecutor did not withhold exculpatory evidence.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>207 S.E.2d 466</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Collin Warner</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>New York – Kings County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1982: convicted of second-degree murder <br>2001: co-defendant confessed he acted alone; conviction vacated; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>An appellate court in 1986 found that the prosecutor's comments during closing argument did not prejudice Warner.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>501 N.Y.S.2d 889</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Calvin Washington</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Texas - McLennan County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1987: convicted of capital murder <br>2000-2001: DNA exoneration <br>2001: released and pardoned</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>Although agreeing the prosecutor made improper comments at trial, the Texas Court of Appeals rejected Washington's claim that these comments deprived him of a fair trial. The court also rejected Washington's claim that the prosecutor failed to disclose exculpatory evidence.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>822 S.W.2d 110 (Washington)</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Kenneth Waters</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Massachusetts – Middlesex County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1983: convicted of first-degree murder and armed robbery <br>2001: DNA exoneration; released</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>On direct appeal in 1987, the court rejected Waters' claim that the state withheld exculpatory evidence.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>506 N.E.2d 859</td></tr></tbody></table><br><table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Name</td><td>Johnny Lee Wilson</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">State/County</td><td>Missouri – Jasper County</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Case history</td><td>1987: convicted of first-degree murder <br>1988: another man confessed <br>1995: released; pardoned</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Description of misconduct</td><td>In 1990, the Missouri Court of Appeals declined to provide post-conviction relief on Wilson's claim that prosecutor Scott Sifferman withheld evidence that another suspect committed the murder.</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#dddddd">Opinions in database</td><td>1990 Mo. App. Lexis 1663</td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p> Neil Gordon http://www.publicintegrity.org/authors/neil-gordon