Call Today for a free Consultation
262-923-8761 24 Hour Emergency Contact

Some exonerees remain legally guilty due to 'Alford' pleas

When evidence of a convicted person's actual innocence comes forward, we imagine that prosecutors immediately ask a judge to void the conviction and release the defendant. We imagine the judge apologizing on behalf of the state. Later, depending on the circumstances, the defendant might be compensated for the time they spent imprisoned unjustly.

The reality is often quite different. According to a recent report by Reporter Megan Rose, the nonprofit investigative journalism outfit ProPublica, prosecutors across the country are working to keep such convictions intact. This occurs even when -- or perhaps especially when -- there is evidence that police or prosecutorial misconduct led to a wrongful conviction.

Take the case of Fred Steese. He was convicted of murder in Nevada and spent two decades behind bars. Then, evidence that he was innocent was found in the prosecution's files. Prosecutors are required by law to turn over all exonerating evidence to the defense, but they had not done so. The evidence? Steese had been hundreds of miles away on the day the murder reportedly took place.

Although there was clear reasonable doubt in his case, the prosecutor didn't apologize and let the wrongfully convicted man go free. Instead, they offered him the chance to get out of prison immediately if he would accept an "Alford" or no-contest plea. Otherwise, the prosecutor said they would retry the case and Steese would risk another conviction.

The result is extremely troubling in cases where a wrongful conviction seems to have occurred. Both offers leave the underlying conviction intact, leaving someone who may be entirely innocent with a serious felony conviction on their record.

That conviction means losing the right to vote or own firearms. It affects what jobs you can get and what housing will be available. It prevents them from claiming compensation for their wrongful conviction. It changes virtually everything in the defendant's life.

According to ProPublica, many prosecutors insist they offer these deals because they are sure the defendant is actually guilty. They realize that retrying the case would be difficult after so much time has passed, and often enough, newly discovered evidence provides reasonable doubt. The subtext is that they know they could not obtain a new conviction.

Ethically, prosecutors should not be prosecuting people when there is clearly reasonable doubt -- and certainly not to avoid questions about police or prosecution misconduct. Yet judges usually endorse these pleas in order to let the innocent defendants go free immediately.

There appears to be a conflict of interest in letting the same prosecution office that wrongfully convicted the defendant in the first instance decide the fate of their innocence claim.  States should consider having a third party, such as an independent miscarriage of justice commission, decide what should be done in each case.

No Comments

Leave a comment
Comment Information
Choosing the Right Lawyer Buting for the Defense In The News

Our Office

Brookfield Office
400 N. Executive Drive
Suite 205
Brookfield, WI 53005

Phone: 262-923-8761
Phone: 262-821-0999
Fax: 262-821-5599
Map & Directions

Glendale Office
6165 North Green Bay Avenue
Glendale, WI 53209

Map & Directions

How Can
We Help You?

Free
Consultation

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information
disclaimer.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

close

Privacy Policy

Email Us For A Response
Back To Top payment