Say someone is convicted of a crime and sent to prison. Say he escapes from prison, but is caught and returned. I assume he is then going to be convicted of a crime constituted by that escape, and sentenced to even more years in prison. Is that correct?
Say he is found later to be innocent of the crime for which he was originally convicted. Now his sentence for that crime no longer applies. But what about the sentence for escaping? Is it likely that that sentence will also be overturned?
I’m in the US, though I wouldn’t mind seeing comments regarding the legalities of such a situation in other countries as well.
Escaping from prison is a separate crime, and the sentence for that most definitely would not be overturned if there was a succesful appeal of his earlier conviction.
In Germany neither, but typically other crimes are committed when escaping, such as damage to property or assault and battery (against law enforcement personnel). The court trying these crimes might assume justification if you did it in order to evade wrongful imprisonment though. Depends on the intensity of these acts. The escape itself, however, is not a crime.
I find it funny in the movie Freeway, Vanessa Lutz in the course of escaping, sort of indirectly has a part in the killing of the jailmarm, yet at the end it is even mentioned.
This is what bothers me about the The Fugitive, Prison Break, and other “wrongfully imprisoned” dramas. Sure, they may be innocent, and maybe they can eventually even prove it, but surely there were a lot of separate crimes committed in escaping and staying out of prison.
I’m guessing another option would be, if a significant portion of the original sentence had been served, to have the sentence for the prison break commuted to time served.
I’m not a lawyer but I am a prison guard. I didn’t see any need to comment because friedo’s post pretty much covered it.
The only thing I’d add is that if you look up the laws on escape, it will usually specify the person has been “convicted” of a crime not “guilty” of a crime - an important distinction in cases like this because even if the prison escapee is innocent he was undeniably convicted.
I imagine this would be a popular option, should the situation ever arise. (Aside: has this ever, actually, happened? Where an escapee was later found to be innocent of the charges that led to the original imprisonment?) The DA would likely file charges against the escapee, who would be sentenced to, say, six months, then the judge could point out that he had already served two years for a crime he didn’t commit, and wave goodbye …