The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals this week overturned a rape conviction out of Dallas for Darryl Adams after DNA testing from the rape kit failed to match his profile. Testing could have been done a decade ago but was denied by the courts. No press coverage on this one yet, as far as Grits can tell.
Mr. Adams was granted relief under Texas' new junk-science writ but the court did not declare Adams actually innocent, though that's the implication of the failure to match his DNA to the rape-kit evidence. So this is another non-exoneration exoneration, leaving Mr. Adams in limbo when it comes to securing compensation for his wrongful conviction. Best of luck to him.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
.jpg)
11 comments:
IANAL, so could someone explain to me what "Do no publish" means on the PDF opinion. Also, it has "Darryl DemItri Adams" but the closest I could find was "Darryl DemEtri Adams" via Google. Is there a problem with the opinion if the person's name is misspelled?
Noelie
Published opinions have precedential value, unpublished ones only affect the case they're about. I don't know that the court misspelled the name, I think the case just hasn't gotten any publicity.
Thanks. I has lurned something today!
Courts and prosecutors: "Well, if he didn't do this, he probably did something else we don't know about..."
True this. And he probably did!
Looks like Dewey restated a comment made by Gov. Ann Richards about Odell Barnes, whose execution proceeded as scheduled
Grits my understanding is that one has to make an actual innocence claim on the post conviction writ. The CCA cannot declare anyone actually innocent for compensation purposes unless one expressly incorporates that into the habeas application. My guess is that the defendant here simply requested post conviction relief without the actual innocence designation
I haven't looked at the pleadings, 10:23, but without that designation Mr. Adams will have to jump through some hoops to get compensation.
Why does the Dallas Co. DA's office seem to have all these problems so frequently?
Odell Barnes was guilty.
I thought that when a conviction is overturned the defendant goes back to retain the original innocence that all defendants entering the courtroom have. Don't we just go back to square one. It is the job of the state to prove guilt, it is not the job of the defendant to prove innocence or anything else. The burden is on the state.
Post a Comment