Interpreting Registry Data
The Registry encourages the public to use the Explore Exonerations table to generate their own statistics on exoneration cases. However, as with any data, users must take care to ensure that the statistics mean what they intend.
In particular, it is important to consider the “denominator,” the set of cases within which certain criteria are searched. For example, a user may want to generate the frequency of cases with a particular Contributing Factor or Case Characteristic within a specific population of cases. That population might be defined by place, such as a state or multiple states, or by time, such as a year or several years. Of particular importance is the Date of Exoneration. The Explore Exonerations table and the Map View are set by default to count all cases from 1989 through the present, but users can modify that interval to include our separate collection of pre-1989 exonerations, or to choose a more limited time period after 1989 (or even both).
The Registry “codes” all cases it publishes. Coding is a social science method that seeks to describe characteristics of groups of cases by identifying common features of individual cases that may be radically different from each other in many respects. These “codes” provide important but limited information on each particular case. For example, the “Mistaken Eyewitness Identification” code treats all cases that meet its definition alike, even though the nature of the identifications that occurred and the causes of the mistakes the code recognizes differ dramatically across cases. (This is one reason why the narratives of the individual cases are as important as the systematic coded data on groups of cases.) The Registry applies dozens of codes to each case.
The Registry generally codes conservatively. Applying a code to a certain case means that we are aware that the case has that attribute. Not applying the code to a case, does not necessarily mean it does not have that attribute—only that we lack affirmative evidence that it does. As a result, the total for many coded variables should be considered an undercount. For example, the "ineffective legal defense" (ILD) code is applied to cases in which we know that ILD occurred, but we are confident that there are many cases in which ILD occurred, but we lack documentation of it. Those cases are not coded “ILD.”
All coding requires some arbitrary coding rules and some degree of subjectivity. Researchers must take both into account. Some Registry codes (e.g., “worst crime”) are less subjective than others (e.g., “relationship between defendant and victim”).
Researchers using our data should understand the Registry's coding rules for the codes they use. Below we explain our criteria for classifying cases as "exonerations," and the coding rules for selected codes.
For further detail on Registry coding, researchers are encouraged to contact Registry staff.
The Registry does not contact exonerees unless they initiate contact with us. Therefore, in most cases, we cannot provide researchers with contact information for exonerees. For users interested in doing research on exonerees, the Innocence Network's Research Review Committee vets any research requests for projects involving Innocence Network exonerees, clients, or people working for member organizations.
Definition of Exoneration
In general, an exoneration occurs when a person who has been convicted of a crime is officially cleared after new evidence of innocence becomes available.
A more precise definition follows.
Exoneration—A person has been exonerated if he or she was convicted of a crime and, following a post-conviction re-examination of the evidence in the case, was relieved of all the consequences of the criminal conviction, and either: (1) was declared to be factually innocent by a government official or agency with the authority to make that declaration; or (2) received (i) a complete pardon by a governor or other competent authority, whether or not the pardon is designated as based on innocence, or (ii) an acquittal of all charges factually related to the crime for which the person was originally convicted, in a court of the jurisdiction in which the person was convicted, or (iii) a dismissal of all charges related to the crime for which the person was originally convicted, by a court or by a prosecutor with the authority to enter that dismissal. The pardon, acquittal, or dismissal must have occurred after evidence of innocence became available that either (i) was not presented at the trial at which the person was convicted; or (ii) if the person pled guilty, was not known by the defendant and the court at the time the plea was entered. The evidence of innocence need not be an explicit basis for the official act that exonerated the person. Despite any other facts, a defendant is not exonerated if there is undisputed evidence that the defendant knowingly possessed physical objects the possession of which directly proves the defendant's guilt of the crime for which the defendant was convicted, or a factually related crime.
Exoneree—A person who was convicted of a crime and later officially declared innocent of that crime, or relieved of all legal consequences of the conviction because evidence of innocence that was not presented at trial required reconsideration of the case.
Code Glossary & Notes
Contributing Factors
False Confession (FC)—A confession is a statement made to law enforcement at any point during the proceedings that was interpreted or presented by law enforcement as an admission of participation in or presence at the crime, even if the statement was not presented at trial. A statement is not a confession if it was made to someone other than law enforcement. A statement that is not at odds with the defense is not a confession. A guilty plea is not a confession.
False or Misleading Forensic Evidence (F/MFE)—Faulty or misleading expert or forensic evidence may have led to a factually erroneous conclusion, at any stage of the investigation or adjudication, that contributed to the false conviction.
Inadequate Legal Defense (ILD)—The exonoree’s trial attorney provided obviously and grossly inadequate representation. We do not require an official ruling of ineffective assistance of counsel to code for this category.
Mistaken Witness Identification (MWID)—At least one witness mistakenly identified the exoneree as a person the witness saw commit the crime or saw the defendant under circumstances that suggest that the defendant participated in the crime (e.g. the witness claims they saw the defendant flee from the scene).
Official Misconduct (OM)—Police, prosecutors, or other government officials significantly abused their authority or the judicial process in a manner that contributed to the exoneree's conviction.
Perjury or False Accusation (P/FA)—A person other than the exoneree committed perjury by making a false statement under oath that incriminated the exoneree for the crime for which the exoneree was later exonerated, or made a similar unsworn statement that would have been perjury if made under oath.
Case Characteristics
Arson—The exoneree was convicted of arson, or the exoneration depended at least in part on evidence that the exoneree did not commit arson.
Bitemark—The exoneree was convicted based at least in part on bitemark evidence.
Child Sex Abuse Hysteria—A case in which the exoneree was convicted of child sex abuse as part of a wave of child sex abuse prosecutions in the 1980s and 1990s based on aggressive and suggestive interviews of children who were thought to be victims. These cases generally included bizarre and implausible claims by the supposed victims, frequently featuring satanic rituals.
Co-Defendant Confessed—A codefendant of the exoneree, or a person who might have been charged as a codefendant, gave a confession that also implicated the exoneree.
Conviction Integrity Unit (CIU)—A Conviction Integrity Unit helped secure the exoneration. (This does not necessarily mean that the prosecutorial office in question made a factual determination that the defendant is innocent.)
DNA—Post-conviction DNA testing, analysis, or interpretation was conducted, and the results were a factor in establishing the factual basis of the exoneration
Homicide—The exoneree was convicted of either murder or manslaughter.
Innocence Organization—An innocence organization helped secure the exoneration. This only includes innocence organizations that are independent of government bodies. It does not include CIUs or innocence commissions.
Jailhouse Informant—A witness who was incarcerated with the exoneree testified or reported that the exoneree confessed to him or her.
Juvenile Defendant—The exoneree was under the age of 18 years old at the time of the offense.
Misdemeanor—The exoneree was exonerated only of misdemeanors, or any other non-felony crimes, unless the maximum term of imprisonment for any of those crimes is more than two years.
No Crime—The exoneree was convicted of a crime that did not occur; for example, a murder conviction that was later vacated based on evidence that the death was an accident or was caused by legitimate self-defense, or a drug crime conviction that was vacated because the crime was fabricated and never happened.
Plea (P)—The exoneree pled guilty, at any stage of the case, to the crime(s) for which they were later exonerated.
Posthumous exoneration—An exoneration of a person after that person died, including cases in which a living codefendant was exonerated under circumstances that clearly indicate that the deceased person would have been exonerated if they were alive.
Sexual Assault—The exoneree was convicted and exonerated of a sexual assault crime or could have been charged with a sexual assault for the criminal conduct for which they were exonerated.
Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Trauma—A diagnosis of “shaken baby syndrome” and/or “abusive head trauma” contributed to the conviction.
Official Misconduct (OM) Codes and Notes
(NOTE: These are not coded for exonerations that occurred before 1989)
OF - OM by Police Officer—This code and the three that follow assign responsibility for the misconduct. Withholding is most often assigned to prosecutors and doesn’t require intent. For other official actors, incompetence or a lack of diligence in performing their work are not on their own official misconduct.
WH - Exculpatory evidence withheld—Withholding exculpatory evidence, commonly called “Brady evidence,” but not limited to misconduct that fits within courts current interpretation of the rule originally announced by the United States Supreme Court in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963).
KP - Prosecutor knowingly permitted witness perjury. The prosecutor has to be aware the testimony is false.
PJ - Perjury by an official actor—Only includes testimonial falsehoods by official actors. It does not include false statements in official documents, such as search warrants.
INT - Misconduct in Interrogation of Exoneree—Common examples of misconduct include physical violence, threats of violence against an exoneree, making threats against an exoneree’s family, or promises by a police officer of lenient treatment of the exoneree by a prosecutor or judge. It is not coded as misconduct when an officer lies to a suspect in custody.
OM by prosecutor during trial—Common examples include knowingly presenting perjury, deliberately misleading the court, racial discrimination in jury selection, and purposely misstating facts or appealing to racial bias in arguments to the judge or the jury.
Official actor(s) disciplined for OM—Discipline includes demotions, fines, reprimands and other discipline by the official’s employer, disciplinary actions by government licensing agencies, and arrests, charges, and convictions in criminal prosecutions.
OM not connected to the conviction for which the exoneree was exonerated—
0 : No or don’t know
1 : Yes, post-conviction misconduct
2 : Yes, search and seizure violations that don’t implicate factual guilt
3 : Yes, physical abuse of the exoneree that did not contribute to the conviction
4 : Yes, expressions of racial prejudice that are not causally related to the conviction
5 : Yes, misconduct that was intended to help obtain a conviction but failed (e.g., threatening a witness to get the witness to lie, but the witness refuses to do so)
6 : Yes, an official actor had an inappropriate sexual or romantic relationship with another party to the case (if these were not disclosed to the defense they should also be coded as Brady violations)
8 : Yes, other misconduct that did not contribute to the conviction
Extreme judicial misconduct—Only actions that are clearly outside the bounds of appropriate judicial behavior.
Witness Tampering—Officials improperly tampered with a witness who testified against the exoneree but did not confess to the crime at issue, or they committed misconduct in interrogating an actual or potential codefendant who confessed and implicated the exoneree.
Other Codes that Appear on the Registry Website
Age—The age of the exoneree at the time of the crime in years. Blank indicates that the age is unknown. If the crime occurred over a period of time/dates, we code the youngest the exoneree was.
Crime—The crime is defined by the exoneree’s conviction, not by allegations or by the original charges. For example, if an exoneree who was charged with murder but pled guilty to manslaughter we would code the charge as manslaughter.
Date of 1st Conviction—For exonerations since 1989, if the month and day are not known, we use June 30. For pre-1989 cases, we use July 15. If the month is known but the day is not known, we use the 15th of the month.
Date of Exon—The date on which the appropriate government official announced that the exoneree was relieved of the legal consequences of the crime. If exoneration occurred in more than one form, we code the date of the first exoneration. If the month and day are not known, for post-1989 cases, we use June 30. For pre-1989 cases, we use July 15. If the month is known, but the day is not known, we use the 15th of the month.
Date of Release—The earliest date on which the exoneree was released from confinement. If the exoneree was never imprisoned or was released prior to conviction, the date of release is the date of conviction. The date of release may occur before the date of exoneration, but never after. If the exoneration is posthumous, then the date of release is the date of death. If the month and day are not known, for post-1989 cases, we use June 30. For pre-1989 cases, we use July 15. If the month is known, but the day is not known, we use the 15th of the month.
Last Update Date—The most recent date that the Narrative or coding of the case was substantially updated (that is, beyond typographical and other minor errors).
Pre-1989—The exoneration occurred before 1989.
Posting Date—The date the case was posted on the Registry.
Race—Race or ethnicity of exoneree based primarily on official records or interviews with persons with knowledge of how the exoneree self-identifies. Only one category per exoneree is used. Race/ethnicity codes are Black, White, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, Other, and Don’t Know.
Recantation—Includes only post-conviction recantations. Not coded for pre-1989 exonerations.
# of victim recanters—Does not include “un-convicted” victims (that is, victims for whose victimization the exoneree was not convicted)
Sex—Sex of exoneree, as exoneree identified at the time of the crime. Sex codes are Male or Female.
State—For federal cases, we use a code of the form Fed-XX where XX is the postal abbreviation for the state or territory in which the crime was committed.
Sentence—The exoneree’s original sentence, even if later reduced on appeal. If convicted more than once, the first sentence. Any flat term-of-years sentence of 99 years or more is coded as Life. For further information about the coding of concurrent and consecutive sentences and other nuances of sentencing, please contact Registry staff.
Years Lost—Calculated from the date of first conviction to the date of release. Excludes time spent in custody prior to conviction and any time where exoneree was incarcerated on an unrelated crime. The number of years lost is rounded to one decimal place.
Victim race/sex codes—Indicates that at least one victim was known to be of that race or sex.
Additional Codes Included on “Export More Data” Spreadsheets
Exonerated CoDs?—Two or more defendants were exonerated for the same crime or parts of the same crime and are listed in the Registry. The 3-digit code consists of a 2-letter state abbreviation followed by a numeral indicating the group from that state in which the exoneree is a member.
Part of a Group Exon? —The exoneree is a member of a group of cases in which systematic misconduct contributed to the wrongful convictions of four or more defendants. More information can be found on our Groups Registry.
Date of Crime—If the crime occurred over a range of dates that includes more than one year, we use the last known date. If the date of crime is not known, we use the date the crime came to the attention of the police.
Date of Arrest—If the defendant was arrested, released, and then arrested again, we use the date of the last arrest before the trial that led to defendant’s conviction: This is the date on which the police had sufficient evidence to charge the crime and the prosecution had sufficient evidence to pursue the case in court.
List Add'l Crimes—Other convictions in addition to the Worst Crine, for which the exoneree was also exonerated.
Why was D Suspected?—The purpose of this code is to describe the information that first led police to consider the defendant as a suspect. In some cases, the most appropriate code is a subjective decision, so these codes should be interpreted with caution.
ID : an eyewitness (including a Co-D) or a victim identified the exoneree by name, reputation, or other information. This code also includes cases in which officers claim to have witnessed D committing a crime—unless the officers framed the exonerees, in which case F, below, is the appropriate code.
A (Appearance) : a victim or witness picked the exoneree out of a large array of pictures, such as a mug book, that happened to include the exoneree (i.e., exoneree was not initially placed in the array because he was a suspect); or someone thought that the exoneree resembled a composite picture or a description of the perpetrator; or a victim or witness saw the exoneree in a public place and thought they recognized the exoneree as the criminal. This does not include cases in which D was picked out of a live or photo lineup, because it doesn’t explain why D was placed in the lineup, which, in most cases, is some form of earlier suspicion such as an eyewitness ID or the exoneree’s relationship to the victim.
I : an informant named the exoneree
REL : exoneree’s relationship to the victim
RELS : exoneree’s relationship to another suspect
PX : evidence of the exoneree’s proximity to the scene of the crime if one did occur; or an admission by the exoneree to participation in an interaction with the supposed victim in which the crime, if there had been one, would have occurred (for example, admission to consensual sex in a rape or sexual abuse exoneration, or admission of harming the victim in an exoneration base on self-defense or accidental harm)
POS : exoneree’s possession of objects associated with the crime (e.g., weapons or contraband)
OBJ : an object associated with the exoneree was found at or near the scene
INJ : exoneree had injuries that suggest participation in the crime
N : exoneree’s name resembled that of the true criminal or another suspect
M : exoneree was believed to have a motive to commit the crime
C : exoneree expressed interest in the case or confessed to the crime before s/he was a suspect
DATA : a database search of any kind implicated the exoneree. The search may be manual; this code does not require automated searching.
CR : exoneree’s criminal record
BR : because of exoneree’s background or reputation
F : exoneree was framed by law enforcement
OTH : some other reason
DK : don't know, given the limited information available
UK : unknown or none apparent, despite substantial information
Convictions - # of Dead Vs—The total number of dead or alleged dead victims associated with the crimes for which the exoneree was convicted and exonerated, regardless of whether the exoneree was prosecuted for them all or not. This code was NOT completed for cases in which the exoneration occurred before 1989.
Convictions - # of Female Vs—The actual number of female victims of violence for which the exoneree was convicted and exonerated. We do not include victims for which the defendant was not convicted and exonerated, even if they were part of the same crime. This code was NOT completed for cases in which the exoneration occurred before 1989.
Convictions - Race of Vs—The race/ethnicity and sex of the actual number of victims of violence for which the exoneree was convicted and exonerated, using the following 3-digit format: the number of victims, their race/ethnicity, their sex. ? indicates that race/ethnicity or sex are unknown. / indicates multiple race/ethnicities or sexes. Our race/ethnicity codes are Black, White, Hispanic, Asian (includes all peoples on the Asian continent [including Indian, Filipinos, and Indonesians] except Russians), Native American (includes Alaska Native), and Other (this includes native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders). Our sex codes are Male or Female. “DK” indicates we don’t know this information. Blanks may indicate No Crime or “victimless” crime cases.
Convictions - Closest Relation of V to D—Codes are: SP (Spouse), ST (Stranger), IF (Immediate Family), EF (Extended Family), L (Lover), F (Friend), AQ (Acquaintance) CW (Co-worker), DK (Don't know). These codes reflect the degree of closeness, and the realities of complex family dynamics. For example, we code SP for a crime involving a man and woman living together for many years, even if they are not legally married.
Form of 1st Conviction—Codes are: Plea, jury trial, trial with no information regarding bench or jury, bench trial (before a judge only), and don’t know.
Date of 2nd Conviction—If the exoneree’s first conviction was reversed and he was convicted again at a retrial for the same criminal conduct, this code records the year of the second conviction. Include re-convictions based on pleas.
2nd Sentence—If the exoneree’s first conviction was reversed and they were convicted again at a retrial for the same criminal conduct, record the sentence the exoneree received for the second conviction
Other False ID—A falsely identified the defendant intentionally.
Mistaken Cross-group ID?—The exoneree was mistakenly identified by a witness of a different racial/ethnic group.
Number of Mistaken ID Witnesses at Trial—The actual number of eyewitnesses who mistakenly identified the exoneree as the perpetrator at trial. "P" indicates that the exoneree pled guilty and there was no trial. "DK' indicates this information is not known.
Tainted ID procedure(s)?—Official actors coerced or manipulated witnesses to falsely identify the defendant from a photo array, a lineup or in some other procedure. The codes indicate that an official actor did one or more of the following:
1. threatened the eyewitness (EW)
2. told the EW to pick the defendant (D)
3. presented D to EW in a photographic or in-person lineup in a manner that made D stand out distinctly from the other people or images presented
4. before the first identification by the EW, the official conducted 3 or more photographic or in-person lineups in which D was the only person who appeared in each lineup
5. encouraged EW to identify D by explaining away possible discrepancies between D’s appearance and the EW's memory or description of the criminal
6. deliberately manipulated the EW to identify D in some other manner.
An identification process that is suggestive or badly run is not necessarily “tainted.”
Year of recantation—The year the recantation was made, not the year that the defendant first became aware of the recantation. “*” indicates that the recantation was not brought to someone who was working on the case professionally (or who might do so) until a year or more after it was made.
Forensic Evidence Used?—Any forensic or expert evidence was used at any stage of the investigation or adjudication.