Unanimous California Supreme Court Reverses Death Penalty Because Los Angeles Prosecutors Withheld Evidence of Innocence, Notes Quinn Emanuel Partner George Hedges

Business Wire, May 5, 2008

LOS ANGELES -- Today in a rare unanimous decision the California Supreme Court found that San Quentin inmate Adam Miranda was wrongly sentenced to death because district attorneys, including senior District Attorney Curt Hazell and now sitting judges Lance Ito and Frederic Horn, withheld confessions to the killing by the prosecutor's star witness. Miranda's lead counsel George R. Hedges of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges and Kerry Bensinger of Bensinger Ritt Tai & Thvedt were elated with the result.

"The Miranda case represents yet another indictment of the death penalty. We have been through a 20-year struggle to locate evidence the DA's office intentionally withheld that showed our client did not commit the murder that placed him on death row 26 years ago," said Mr. Hedges. "The case reveals an outrageous miscarriage of justice."

"It took us years to force the DA's office to turn over the Miranda files, and there in the back of one of the files was an envelope containing a confession to the murder by the star witness the prosecutors used to condemn our client to death," added Mr. Bensinger. "It shows just how corrupt the system is. Without an all-out legal assault our client would have been put to death years ago for a crime he didn't commit."

On three prior occasions the California Supreme Court denied efforts by Mr. Miranda's counsel to obtain relief. "What if we had just given up?" remarked Hedges, "The reversal has to make anyone wonder how many more are there wrongly sentenced to death because the prosecutors simply withheld evidence of innocence."

Mr. Miranda was convicted in 1982 for the murder of Gary Black. In order to obtain a death sentence, prosecutors charged him with a second murder involving the stabbing death of Robert Hosey. The star witness on that charge against Mr. Miranda was Joe Saucedo. At the time that Mr. Saucedo was testifying against Mr. Miranda, the prosecutors had in their possession a letter in which Mr. Saucedo confessed in detail that he had committed the crime. It was this letter that then District Attorney Lance Ito placed in Mr. Miranda's file without ever disclosing its contents to Mr. Miranda's counsel. Ultimately Mr. Miranda's counsel found four more witnesses who testified that Mr. Saucedo had confessed to them that he was the murderer. The District Attorneys' office had knowledge of each of these confessions while seeking the death penalty against Mr. Miranda. The California Supreme Court found in the face of this evidence the imposition of the death penalty was improper.

Mr. Hedges took on the Miranda case in 1988. At that time Mr. Miranda had lost his appeal and two additional efforts under habeas corpus to have his death sentence commuted by the California Supreme Court. Mr. Bensinger joined with Mr. Hedges in 1994 and recommenced efforts to obtain Mr. Miranda's files. At that time Mr. Miranda's defense team had no idea that the Saucedo confessions were out there. It was only after a two-year fight in federal court that the team was able to look at the DA's files.

"It took a federal judge's order to force the DA to turn over files they originally claimed didn't even exist," said Mr. Bensinger. He added, "And at the time there was even an effort by the DA's office to have all files in death penalty cases destroyed."

"The most fundamental problem with the death penalty is that the system is too flawed to allow it to be carried out fairly and without innocent people being put to death," said Hedges. "This case proves the point in the strongest possible terms."