New York Governor Vetoes Bill to Make Conviction Challenges Easier – Days before Christmas, Governor Kathy Hochul of New York rejected a bill that, if passed, would have simplified the process for individuals who pleaded guilty to crimes to contest their convictions. This proposal, supported by criminal justice reform advocates, faced strong opposition from prosecutors.
The Democrat said the bill’s “sweeping expansion of eligibility for post-conviction relief” would “upend the judicial system and create an unjustifiable risk of flooding the courts with frivolous claims”, in a veto letter released on Saturday. Under current state law, individuals who plead guilty to crimes are typically barred from seeking case reopenings based on claims of innocence, except in specific situations involving new DNA evidence.
People Also Read: Trump Asks Appeals Court to Throw Out 2020 Election Subversion Charges
The June-passed bill aimed to broaden admissible evidence of innocence, encompassing elements like video footage or another person confessing to the crime. It would have also considered claims of coerced guilty pleas. Opponents, including prosecutors and crime victim advocates, cautioned that the bill could lead to an influx of baseless legal appeals by the guilty.
Erie County District Attorney John Flynn, the president of the District Attorney’s Association of the State of New York, expressed concerns in a July letter to Governor Hochul, citing the potential strain on an already overburdened criminal justice system. The proposed legislation could have benefited individuals like Reginald Cameron, exonerated in 2023 after pleading guilty to first-degree robbery for a reduced sentence.
Arrested in 1994 for the fatal shooting of Kei Sunada, Cameron, then 19, confessed after hours of questioning without legal representation, serving over eight years in prison before his exoneration. His conviction was overturned following a reexamination by prosecutors, who discovered discrepancies between the details of the crime and the confessions that formed the basis of the conviction.
The investigation also revealed that the detective securing Cameron’s confessions was linked to other high-profile cases resulting in exonerations, such as the Central Park Five case. Several states, including Texas, have implemented measures over the years to prevent wrongful convictions. In 2015, Texas amended a statute allowing convicted individuals to request post-conviction DNA testing.
Additionally, in 2017, another amended rule mandated law enforcement agencies to electronically record complete interrogations of suspects in serious felony cases. “We’re pretty out of step when it comes to our post-conviction statute,” Amanda Wallwin, a state policy advocate at the Innocence Project, said of New York. “We claim to be a state that cares about racial justice, that cares about justice period. To allow Texas to outmaneuver us is and should be embarrassing,” she said.
In 2018, New York’s highest court upheld the principle that individuals who enter guilty pleas cannot contest their convictions unless backed by DNA evidence, creating a significant hurdle for defendants to present compelling non-DNA evidence before a judge. A report by the New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers highlights a consistent decline over the past three decades in the proportion of criminal cases reaching trial in New York.
Approximately 99% of misdemeanor charges and 94% of felony charges in the state are resolved through guilty pleas. “In my work, I know there are a lot of circumstances where people plead guilty to crimes because they are advised or misadvised by their attorneys at the time,” said Donna Aldea, a lawyer at the law firm Barket Epstein Kearon Aldea & LoTurco.
“Sometimes they’re afraid that if they go to trial, they’ll face much worse consequences, even if they didn’t commit the crime.” She emphasized that the current structure of the state’s criminal justice system makes it extremely challenging for individuals to contest their guilty pleas years later, especially when new evidence surfaces or when they are in a more favorable financial position to challenge their convictions.