The New York Times today has an article about a death row inmate who, in exchange for pleading guilty to first-degree murder, was banished from Oklahoma.
Although the words "habeas corpus" are never mentioned, they play an important part of the story as the defendant was granted habeas relief from the 10th Circuit based on IAC at trial. That decision began the progression towards the guilty plea, which included an intervening second trial and conviction -- which was also overturned on IAC grounds, that one by a state court.
What's interesting about the article is that it is kind of fashioned as an actual innocence-type story, but it never really makes the case that this is an actual innocence case. The plea agreement suggests that there are strong questions about his guilt. And the main witness appears to have been completely unreliable. But it never really talks much about those things.
Rather, the article is more about the unusual guilty plea and how difficult and confusing re-entry into society can be after a long incarceration. Worth checking out.
Comments