LogFAQs > #965356700

In 2018, a federal court overturned Jones conviction, concluding that he had failed to receive effective counsel, a violation of his Sixth Amendment rights. Had that happened, a federal judge ruled, there is a reasonable probability that his jury would not have convicted him of any of the crimes with which he was charged and previously convicted.

After losing in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Arizonas attorney general appealed the decision to the Supreme Court. During those oral arguments, state prosecutors repeatedly argued that innocence isnt enough of a reason to throw out Jones conviction.

On Monday morning, by a 6-3 vote, the Supreme Court concurred: Barry Jones innocence is not enough to keep him off of death row. The state of Arizona can still kill Jones, even if there exists a preponderance of evidence that he committed no crime.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-supreme-court-just-said-in-in-shinn-v-ramirez-that-evidence-of-innocence-is-not-enough

(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Courts conservative majority decided on Monday that people in state prison no longer have a broad constitutional right to present new evidence in federal court to support claims that they werent adequately represented at trial or on appeal.

The courts opinion effectively guts a final safeguard against prosecutorial and judicial error or misconduct. It will leave people who have been wrongfully convicted without a court to turn to for justice, and increases the likelihood that some innocent prisoners will be executed.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/supreme-court-prioritizes-expedience-not-justice-wrongful-convictions-2022-05-25/