A man who insists he’s innocent of a 1991 Brooklyn homicide for which he spent 20 years in prison will finally get a chance to clear his name after an appeal court ruled — for the first time in New York history — that an innocence claim alone is enough to merit a second look at a conviction.
The ruling, in the case of Derrick Hamilton, found that incarcerating an innocent person is unconstitutional even when all legal protections have been met.
“While I’m thankful for the appellate court,” Hamilton said Wednesday, “it is a crime that it has taken this long for me to receive a shot at justice.”
Prosecutors have already been looking into Hamilton’s case for some months as part of an unprecedented review of about 50 homicide cases handled by retired Det. Louis Scarcella. The ruling might impact other inmates who argue they’re also innocent, although it sets a high standard of proof.
“The district attorney is reviewing the decision,” a spokeswoman for the office said.
Hamilton, 48, has been fighting for years to overturn a guilty verdict for the murder of Nathaniel Cash, arguing he has four alibi witnesses who put him in Connecticut at the time of the Bed-Stuy shooting and that the star witness against him took back her story.
But judge after judge cited procedural reasons when denying his requests. Most recently, Brooklyn Supreme Justice Raymond Guzman denied him a hearing in 2011 — a decision that was now overturned.
Hamilton showed he could be innocent “based upon evidence of a credible alibi and manipulation of the witnesses, and the fact that the witness against him has recanted,” the appeals panel wrote. “Accordingly, there should be a hearing on his claim of actual innocence.”
The Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department instructed that if a judge finds in the Hamilton’s favor, the indictment should be dismissed, unlike the result of a typical post-conviction hearing in which a judge can either uphold the guilty verdict or order a new trial.
“We’re happy that the court has recognized that the conviction of an actually innocent person is a violation of our constitution,” said Hamilton’s lawyer Jonathan Edelstein. He explained that until now, a convict had to also cite another reason, like ineffective counsel, as basis for a hearing.
Hamilton, who was released on parole just over two years ago after the Daily News highlighted his battle, urged the new Brooklyn DA to simply dismiss the case.
While celebrating the court victory — which fell on his ninth wedding anniversary — he called on DA Kenneth Thompson “to stop this charade and vacate the conviction once and for all.”
