Wrongful Conviction Lawsuit Defense Blog : Wrongful Conviction Defense Lawyer & Attorney : Andrew M. Hale Law Firm

In a 12 page opinion issued yesterday, Judge Jeffrey Cole denied plaintiff's motion to compel case files from defense expert Arthur Young.  Plaintiff sought documents in 10-15 cases in which Mr. Young conducted Absorption/Inhibition testing.  Mr. Young has opined that defendant Raymond Lenz's inconclusive findings in the Jerry Miller testing were appropriate.  Plaintiff contends that Mr. Young does not use appropriate methods in interpreting and lacks proficiency in Absorption/Inhibition testing.   Plaintiff provided no evidence to support that and their motion was rejected.  

The case is set for trial on February 22, 2010 before United States District Judge Suzanne Conlon.   

As previously reported,  the police officer defendants were dismissed from the lawsuit after Judge Conlon found that the police did not fabricate any evidence against Jerry Miller and that this was an unfortunate case of eyewitness misidentification.    

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

We recently highlighted how the Chicago Sun-Times is clearly biased against Chicago Police and would not report on the police officers who were vindicated in the 26 Year wrongful conviction Jerry Miller lawsuit.

Unlike the Sun-TImes, the Virginia Daily Press, a Tribune paper, is reporting that a Federal Judge in Virginia has granted summary judgment for the James City County Police Department in a lawsuit brought by W. Walker Ware IV. According to the Daily Press: 

On Sept. 3, U.S. District Court Judge Mark S. Davis threw the suit out, ruling that Ware's claims were baseless and that his rights had not been violated by his arrest and incarceration. In a 41-page ruling, Davis retraced the entire incident in question, methodically absolving the officers of any wrongdoing. Granting summary judgment required the judge to view all available evidence in the best possible light for Ware, then determine if a jury could rule in his favor.

The $3.5 million suit was brought in January 2008 by W. Walker Ware IV, who was arrested in 2006 for disorderly conduct, obstruction of justice and assault and battery of a police officer. The suit, in turn, alleged assault and battery, as well as false arrest and illegal imprisonment, malicious prosecution and intentional infliction of emotional distress against four officers. The suit also alleged that county policy allowed the misconduct.

County Attorney Leo Rogers said the ruling was a "clear vindication for the police department and the officers."

According to Judge Davis in his Opinion,  based on information provided in the case, the officers were right to arrest Ware and that Ware assaulted one officer, made threatening statements, had been drinking and was uncooperative at the time.

It is sad that we have to blog about the media actually doing their job....But given the lack of reporting on the police side - especially when a frivolous lawsuit is exposed - a reporter needs the occasional "pat on the back."  Thank you Dan Parsons of the Daily Press. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

 

 

 

 The Chicago newspapers are quick to run a story when a person merely makes allegations of police misconduct. Yet, those same newspapers are not so quick to run a story when it is shown that such allegations were false and there was no police misconduct. The recent case of Jerry Miller is a good example of this bias. Miller sued several now-retired Chicago police officers alleging that they framed him for a rape back in 1982. Miller spent 26 years in prison for the crime that DNA has now shown he did not commit. A federal district court judge recently granted the police officers' motion for summary judgment finding there to be no evidence of police misconduct as a matter of law. If the police had lost this case, this story would have been front page news. Yet, incredibly, when the police officers won this case, the Chicago Sun-Times made no mention of the case at all. This is despite the fact that Sun-Times federal court reporter Natasha Korecki - one who is quick to report about alleged police misconduct - was notified of the 26 page legal opinion. Korecki and the Sun-Times chose not to report on the case and the police officers' victory. Does this seem fair to the CPD? We don't think so. What do you think?

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

We decided to launch our very own YouTube channel. 

Visit DontBlameTheCops YouTube Channel to see the latest media coverage on the Jerry Miller decision.  

Here is the ABC Channel 7 News coverage: 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

         

Barry Scheck and Jerry Miller speak at the Gel 2009 conference about Miller's wrongful conviction case.  Barry Scheck of Neufeld, Scheck & Brustin, represent Jerry Miller in his lawsuit.  

This speaking engagement came just days before United States District Court Judge Suzzane Conlon ruled in favor of the police officers in the lawsuit.  As previously report, Judge Conlon found that the officers had probable cause to arrest Miller.  The court further found that the lineup - where Miller was identified - was fair. 

Although Miller was exonerated on DNA evidence, the police did their jobs and did not commit any misconduct.  

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

 

Andrew Hale & Associates has released the following press release which has been picked up by the Chicago Tribune , ABC7 News Chicago , WBBM780 , and the Newswire

Chicago, IL - August 17, 2009 -- A federal district court judge has ruled in favor of three retired Chicago police officers who were sued by Jerry Miller in a federal civil rights lawsuit. Miller was convicted in 1982 of raping a woman at a parking garage in the Gold Coast section of Chicago.

Miller was identified by two employees who worked at the parking garage and stopped a man - later identified as Miller - as he was attempting to drive his rape victim's car out of the parking garage, with the victim locked in the trunk.

After spending 26 years in prison, Miller was released after DNA testing from the crime scene proved that Miller was not the rapist. Shortly thereafter, Miller filed a civil lawsuit, alleging that several now retired Chicago police officers had framed him for the crime by conducting a suggestive lineup and failing to disclose material exculpatory evidence.

Judge Suzanne B. Conlon rejected all of Miller's claims against the officers and granted their motion for summary judgment in its entirety finding as a matter of law that the officers did not engage in any misconduct.

The retired police officers were represented by attorneys Andrew Hale, Avi Kamionski, Ebone Liggins, and Christina Liu from the law firm of Andrew M. Hale & Associates, LLC.

About Andrew M. Hale & Associates

Andrew M. Hale & Associates specializes in the defense of civil rights lawsuits brought against municipalities and police officers. The firm's principal attorneys are Andrew M. Hale and Avi T. Kamionski. The firm maintains a blog dedicated to the defense of police officers in wrongful conviction cases: www.wrongfulconvictionlawsuitdefense.com or www.dontblamethecops.com.

For more information contact: Andrew M. Hale, 312-341-9646, ahale@ahalelaw.com, www.ahalelaw.com

*Source Andrew M. Hale & Associates - Federal Court Case no. 08 C 773

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

 As recently reported, the district court granted summary judgment in favor of three retired Chicago police officers who were sued by plaintiff Jerry Miller in a civil rights lawsuit in the Northern District of Illinois. One of Miller's claims was that the police officers conducted an unduly suggestive lineup. The court rejected that argument, stating: "A lineup does not require five persons with identical measurements and countenances. United States v. Funches, 84 F.3d 249, 253 (7th Cir. 1996). It is undisputed that Miller and the other participants in the lineup were males, black, between 5'6" and 6', between 150 and 170 pounds, and between 23 and 31 years old. Miller was the same height as a filler, one inch taller than a filler, and four to five inches shorter than two fillers. He weighed the same as two fillers, was five pounds lighter than a filler, and was 20 pounds lighter than a filler. The parity level establishes the lineup was not unduly suggestive."  (For more information on this case, see the prior blog post).

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

 Three retired Chicago police officers who were sued for allegedly framing plaintiff Jerry Miller received a total victory when District Court Judge Suzanne B. Conlon granted their motion for summary judgment in its entirely. Miller was convicted in 1982 of a brutal rape in the Gold Coast area of Chicago. He was convicted based on the testimony of two eyewitnesses who identified Miller as the man who attempted to drive his rape victim's car out a parking garage where they worked at the time. The parking lot attendants foiled the rapist's escape by preventing him from driving the car out of the parking garage. Miller spent 26 years in prison before being released in 2006 based on new DNA testing which showed that Miller was not the rapist. That DNA testing lead to the real culprit, Robert Weeks, who was already incarcerated for other sexual assaults. Miller subsequently brought a civil lawsuit against several retired Chicago police officers alleging that they framed him for the rape by conducting a suggestive lineup and photo array and by failing to disclose material evidence. In a 26-page opinion, Judge Conlon rejected all of Miller's claims and held that the Officers were entitled to summary judgment. Judge Conlon stated "The police officers are entitled to summary judgment on Count I for [Section] 1983 denial of a fair trial because Miller presents no genuine issue of material fact that the lineup and photo array were unduly suggestive or tainted his trial. He presents no genuine issue of material fact that evidence about the photo array was suppressed or material. And he presents no evidence of a conspiracy. The police officers are entitled to summary judgment on Miller's substantive due process claim because it is not legally viable, and Miller presents no genuine issue of material fact that the police officers fabricated evidence. Summary judgment is granted to the police officers on Count V for malicious prosecution because the undisputed facts demonstrate probable cause to arrest and prosecute Miller. Summary judgment is granted to the police officers on Count VI for IIED because Miller presents no genuine issue of material fact that the police officers fabricated evidence." The court's ruling confirmed what the defense attorneys had been stating all along - that this was an unfortunate case of eyewitness misidentification - not police misconduct. The police officers were represented by Andrew Hale, Avi Kamionski, Ebone Liggins, and Christina Liu from the firm of Andrew M. Hale & Associates, LLC. Plaintiff Jerry Miller was represented by John Stainthorp from the Peoples  Law Office and Nick Brustin, Peter Neufeld, and Barry Scheck from the Innocence Project.

Here is the opinion

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

 The Chicago Tribune is reporting this morning that:

Roughly a month after the advent of a law allowing the wrongfully convicted to circumvent the governor in seeking certificates of innocence, Gov. Rod Blagojevich pardoned four exonerated men convicted of crimes ranging from rape to murder.

Two weeks ago, the men filed for certificates of innocence with the circuit courts after waiting for a response from Blagojevich, who has been criticized for taking too much time to respond to clemency petitions. Blagojevich pardoned 26 people Thursday.

Among those pardoned based on innocence were Marlon Pendleton and Jerry Miller, who were falsely convicted of sexual assault charges before DNA evidence exonerated them. Also pardoned was Luis Ortiz, convicted of a torture-murder in 1997 and exonerated in 2002, and Robert Wilson, pardoned after nearly a decade in prison for an attempted murder after he was falsely identified.

The Tribune does not identify all 26 individuals.

The clemency petitions are not the method by which these individuals were or are released from prison.  In Jerry Miller's case, he has been free for some time.  His request for a pardon is merely a formality. Miller needs an innocence pardon to seek money for his imprisonment from the Illinois Court of Claims. Given Blagojevich's lengthy time to respond to clemency petitions, lawyers for these individuals lobbied for a new law allowing a judge to issue a "certificate of innocence" to circumvent the Governor and allow for a petition before the Illinois Court of Claims.  Not clear who beat whom to the punch, but these individuals either got certificates and/or pardons based on innocence. 

As previously reported by the Center, Jerry Miller has a federal lawsuit against the City of Chicago, several police officers, and crime lab personnel.  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Jerry Miller has filed a federal court civil rights lawsuit against the City of Chicago and several retired Chicago Police Officers. Miller was arrested in 1981 and charged with raping a woman at a parking garage at 506 N. Rush Street in Chicago. Two parking lot attendants identified Miller from a police lineup as the person attempting to drive the rape victim's car out of the parking structure while the victim was locked in the trunk. Miller was convicted at his criminal trial and spent 26 years in prison. In July 2006 the Cook County State's Attorney's Office agreed to post-conviction DNA testing that showed that Miller was not the contributor of a DNA profile found on the victim's clothing. Miller has now filed suit against the City of Chicago and several now-retired Chicago Police Officers. Miller alleges, among other things, that the Officers told the two parking lot attendants to pick Miller out of a police lineup. The factual basis for this allegation is unknown at this time and the two parking lot attendants are deceased. The case has been assigned to District Court Judge Suzanne Conlon. Miller is represented by John Stainthorp at the Peoples Law Office. The Police Officer Defendants are represented by Andrew M. Hale and Avi Kamionski from Andrew M. Hale & Associates.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Jerry Miller, who was released from prison in March 2006, after being incarcerated for 26 years, recently had his conviction expunged due to DNA testing that showed he did not rape a 44 year old woman back in 1981 on the roof of a parking garage at 506 N. Rush Street in Chicago. Miller became a suspect when police officers thought he looked like a sketch of the attacker. Miller was brought in for a lineup and identified by two parking lot attendants. At trial, the victim testified that Miller looked like her attacker. Miller denied any role in the crime. After a trial, the jury found Miller guilty of rape, robbery, aggravated kidnapping and aggravated battery. Judge Thomas Maloney sentenced him to 45 years in prison. Miller's case was reviewed by the Innocence Project in New York, which triggered the DNA testing of the victim's slip. After Miller was excluded by DNA tests, the unknown DNA profile was submitted to the FBI's convicted offender database and a match was found. Miller was represented by assistant public defender William Wolf and Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld from the Innocence Project.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link