you go to trial on a murder charge. you take the stand and claim evidence had been tampered with by the police. your found guilty and go to prison for life. your appeals come and go. finally your released after doing 13 and 1/2 years. you do 5 years on parole and another 5 years go by. you get a bug up your butt because this conviction keeps coming up and interfering with parts of your life. you decide to go back and get some of the trial transcripts and find mention of a small piece of evidence that was mentioned once and then because of other like evidence this small piece that demonstrates the evidence tampering you testified to is overlooked by everyone. the prosecution almost seems to deliberately question his witnesses away from the daming evidence to the other like evidence. My question is almost 30 years after trial you find clear evidence that you were found guilty by the use of evidence that had been tampered with by the police what recourse is there? sure would appreciate some help.
Reported for forum change.
Welcome to the SDMB, brakeshoe1. Although some of our members are lawyers, all of them will tell you that an anonymous online message board is not a reliable source of legal advice.
That said, I’ll move this thread to IMHO (from ATMB), which is where advice – reliable and not-so-reliable – is offered.
twickster, for the SDMB
As a general matter, the procedure for vacating or setting aside a conviction is established by state law.
After 23½ years, need answer fast?
In this case, a thing called the statute of limitations will come into play.