Exoneration

Exoneration occurs when the conviction for a crime is reversed, either through demonstration of innocence, a flaw in the conviction, or otherwise. Attempts to exonerate convicts are particularly controversial in death penalty cases, especially where new evidence is put forth after the execution has taken place. The transitive verb, "to exonerate" can also mean to informally absolve one from blame.

"Exonerated" redirects here. For the legal film, see The Exonerated.
Criminal procedure
Criminal trials and convictions
Rights of the accused
Verdict
Sentencing
Post-sentencing
Related areas of law
Portals
  •  Law portal

The term "exoneration" also is used in criminal law to indicate a surety bail bond has been satisfied, completed, and exonerated. The judge orders the bond exonerated; the clerk of court time stamps the original bail bond power and indicates exonerated as the judicial order.

Based on DNA evidence

DNA evidence is a relatively new instrument of exoneration. The first convicted defendant from a United States prison to be released on account of DNA testing was David Vasquez, in 1989. Recently, DNA evidence has been used to exonerate a number of persons either on death row or serving lengthy prison sentences. As of October 2003, the number of states authorizing convicts to request DNA testing on their behalf, since 1999, has increased from two to thirty. Access to DNA testing varies greatly by degree; post-conviction tests can be difficult to acquire. Organizations like the Innocence Project are particularly concerned with the exoneration of those who have been convicted based on weak evidence. As of October 2003, prosecutors of criminal cases must approve the defendant's request for DNA testing in certain cases.

Monday, April 23, 2007, Jerry Miller became the 200th person in the United States exonerated through the use of DNA evidence.[1] There is a national campaign in support of the formation of state Innocence Commissions, statewide entities that identify causes of wrongful convictions and develop state reforms that can improve the criminal justice system.

As of December 2018, 362 people in the U.S. had been exonerated based on DNA tests. In nearly half of these cases, faulty forensics contributed to the original conviction.[2]

Per February 4, 2014 NPR article, Laura Sullivan cited Samuel Gross, a University of Michigan law professor stating that exonerations were on the rise, and not just because of DNA evidence. Only one-fifth of the exonerations last year relied on newly tested DNA, a little less than a third of exonerations occurred due to further investigating by law enforcement agencies.[3]

gollark: Less good than they otherwise would be, yes, but not exactly to the point that it'll be awful in 50 years or something like that.
gollark: I don't think any of the IPCC climate change scenarios actually have stuff like poverty and wealth and whatever getting *worse* on average, though.
gollark: Ah yes, the very trustworthy Wikipedia list of greenhouse gases mentions this "nitrogen dioxide".
gollark: I see.
gollark: I do not really biology. Please explain.

See also

References
  1. The Innocence Project - Know the Cases: Browse Profiles:Jerry Miller Archived April 3, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
  2. Colloff, Pamela. "Bloodstain Analysis Convinced a Jury She Stabbed Her 10-Year-Old Son. Now, Even Freedom Can't Give Her Back Her Life". propublica.org. ProPublica. Archived from the original on January 16, 2020. Retrieved 16 January 2020.
  3. Sullivan, Laura (4 Feb 2014). "Exonerations On The Rise, And Not Just Because Of DNA". NPR. Retrieved 4 February 2014.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.