News

Listen and subscribe to the Duke Law Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Soundcloud, and YouTube.

Quincy Amerson, a client of the Wrongful Convictions Clinic at Duke Law, was released from prison on March 13 this year, after spending more than 20 years behind bars. He was convicted of first-degree murder in 2001 and sentenced to life without parole. After taking up Amerson's case, the clinic presented exculpatory evidence that led to a dismissal. A Superior Court judge found that Amerson was denied a fair trial due and exonerated him of the crime.

Speakers:
James E. Coleman, Jr
John S. Bradway Distinguished Professor of the Practice of Law
Director, Wrongful Convictions Clinic
Director, Center for Criminal Justice and Professional Responsibility

Quincy Amerson
Client, Wrongful Convictions Clinic

Lucas Mears '24
Former student-attorney, Wrongful Convictions Clinic

Jamie Lau (Guest Host)
Clinical Professor of Law
Supervising Attorney, Wrongful Convictions Clinic
Deputy Director, Center for Criminal Justice and Professional Responsibility

-----

Excerpts

Reaction to going to trial and then being convicted:

Lau - "As you were convicted, what did you feel in those moments? What were you thinking as you went to trial and then were convicted?"

Amerson - “It was sickening, man, because we sat in there and heard all this so-called evidence, which really didn't amount to anything. And then, to be found guilty like that ... It was horrific. I couldn't believe it. I was upset, highly angered. But, at the end of the day, I knew I had to keep pushing on."

Taking on the case and committing to proving Amerson's innocence:

Coleman - “We then pulled some of the records that we could get right away and looked at the evidence. We reviewed the opinion on appeal. The evidence that the court pointed to as implicating Quincy in the killing of the little girl seemed very thin and not convincing.

“Then we realized that this whole case had been based on a reconstruction done by a highway patrol officer who had no real experience with reconstructions; particularly multi-car reconstructions. At that point, we thought there was a substantial likelihood that he was not guilty of the murder.”

Finding the evidence that proved Amerson innocence:

Coleman - “Well, we knew early on in our investigation that the key was the reconstruction, so we focused on that. We interviewed all of the witnesses and talked to the analysts at the State Bureau of Investigation about the tests they had done on the evidence, trying to establish that they were not able to link any of the evidence directly to Quincy's car. So, we found a reconstructionist in Pennsylvania, a young guy named Shawn Harrington, who had not done a criminal case before. But he was very good at the science of reconstruction. He did a write-up of his conclusions, and it all made sense. It was straightforward and understandable. So, we got him to do a formal report, which we circulated. Based on his report, we filed a motion for appropriate relief and eventually forced the state to respond to our attack on the reconstruction.

“They talked to the head of the State Bureau of Investigation's Reconstruction Unit, and he concluded exactly as Shawn had—that it was a bogus reconstruction. It didn't follow a scientific method, and the analysis did not support the conclusion. To her credit, the prosecutor, as soon as she got that report back, told us about it.

“I think there are some prosecutors who would not have done that. But she didn't wait until February, when we were scheduled to have a hearing. She told us and the judge right away that her expert said the reconstruction did not support the conviction. We then had an evidentiary hearing just on that issue, and she effectively conceded that the conviction had to be overturned."

Working on Amerson's case as a student-attorney:

Mears - "One of the largest projects that I got to work on, which was a real highlight of law school, was preparing for and then arguing a motion to decide the case as a matter of law. We mooted that, worked on the preparation for that. And so, that was a really rewarding experience to deliver that argument in front of the judge."

-----

Resources:
Wrongful Convictions Clinic

View full transcript here