Innocence commission of NC

[dio]

N.C. Innocence Inquiry Commission gains support


By Paul Woolverton
Staff writer



The state needs a new way to review the cases of innocent men who may be in North Carolina prisons, the chief justice of the state Supreme Court says.

Toward that end, the legislature is considering a proposal to create the N.C. Innocence Inquiry Commission. The idea disturbs some prosecutors, who say mechanisms to help people who are wrongly convicted already are in place. But advocates for the proposed commission say it provides a solution to a long-standing problem.

"I became convinced after several high-profile exonerations we needed something of this nature," said I. Beverly Lake Jr., the state's chief justice. "I think we've got an excellent criminal justice system, but it's not perfect."

Since the late 1980s, at least eight prisoners in North Carolina were freed because of evidence that cleared them or because juries found them not guilty after new trials.

One man spent 21 years in prison for a rape that he did not commit. Three men had been on death row, including Timothy Hennis, a former Fort Bragg soldier convicted in 1986 of a triple murder in Cumberland County.

Two years ago, Lake appointed a commission to consider better ways to review whether people are innocent. This group recommended the creation of the N.C. Innocence Inquiry Commission.

If the state creates an innocence commission, it would be the first such agency in the country, Lake said. Great Britain has had a similar commission since 1997.

Rep. Rick Glazier of Fayetteville and Sen. Dan Clodfelter of Charlotte have filed legislation to create the commission.

The proposal would create a seven-person commission, plus a support staff, to review people's claims of innocence.

The commission could then conduct an inquiry and subpoena witnesses, records and other evidence. After hearing the evidence, it would vote. If at least five commissioners agree, the innocence claim would be forwarded to a panel of three judges.

The judges would hold a hearing and vote. If all three agree that the person is innocent, they would dismiss the charges against the defendant.

The estimated cost for the innocence commission would be $400,000 in its first year and $360,000 a year after that.


Existing process

Under existing law, defendants appeal their cases through the court system. Their cases go to the state Court of Appeals and state Supreme Court. Failing there, they sometimes can take their cases to a federal Court of Appeals. In rare instances, the cases are considered by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The appeals courts generally take years to review cases and make decisions.

Meanwhile, if there is new information, the defendant can ask a local Superior Court judge to review his case and grant a hearing. The request is called a motion for appropriate relief. Many are filed, and they take months for judges to process. Most of these motions do not involve innocence claims.

As of late May, Cumberland County Superior Court was reviewing motions for appropriate relief filed in October.

Even if the innocence commission is set up, defendants could still seek their freedom through the existing system.

District Attorney Johnson Britt of Robeson County, a former president of the N.C. Conference of District Attorneys, doesn't think the new commission is needed.

"Personally, I think it duplicates a procedure that is already available" through the motion for appropriate relief and appeals courts, he said.

In 1988, the state Supreme Court granted a new trial for Hennis, the Bragg soldier sentenced to death for the 1985 murders of an Air Force wife and two of her children. Death row inmate Alan Gell was granted a new trial in 2002 for a 1995 murder in Bertie County through a motion for appropriate relief. Hennis and Gell were found not guilty at their second trials.

"Those are both examples of how the system works," Britt said.

State Attorney General Roy Cooper, too, has reservations about the innocence commission.

"We're looking here at creating a new commission, and that's one way to go about it," Cooper said. "But another way to go about it would be to make some changes in the current system that we have. And I think that that approach should still be on the table."

Cooper said that after a trial, the existing appeals system concentrates mostly on court procedures and legal technicalities, "and there is not a good way to look back into the facts of the case during the appellate process."

The laws for motions for appropriate relief could be modified to address those questions, Cooper said.

That wouldn't be good enough, said Christine Mumma. She is executive director of the group that Lake appointed to study the issue, and she's legal counsel to the N.C. Center on Actual Innocence. The center investigates inmates' claims of innocence and pursues some of these claims in court.

"Our post-conviction process is one, overloaded, so it's difficult for judges to weed out the credible claims," she said. "And two, there's no longer the presumption that you're innocent. There's the the presumption that you're guilty, so overcoming that burden is very, very difficult."


Multiple motions

The group studying the issue noted that Darryl Hunt, wrongly imprisoned for 19 years for rape and murder, filed 11 motions for appropriate relief, Mumma said. Charles Munsey, wrongly sent to death row, filed four.

The normal court process can be too adversarial and too political to ascertain the truth, Mumma said.

"The DA is typically elected. We want our DAs to be tough on crime. We want our judges to be fair but tough on crime," she said. "And to bring new evidence forward, for them to say, 'Yeah, we made a mistake,' that's a lot of pressure. So this commission allows for that burden to be shared."

With an innocence commission to investigate a claim, "it's not about resources, it's not about who has more money to do the investigation. It's a true, truth-seeking exercise," Mumma said.