[ddog080]

A friend of mine was accused and convicted of sexual abuse with a child. He took a plea deal of sexual assault and served his time and did everything he was supposed to do (this is before I even knew him). He comes from a broken family. His nephew looks up to him as a Father, because his real dad was never there. One day at church, the nephew was in the boys room and needed assistance from his Uncle from getting (something) caught in his zipper. This is how it all began.
A woman from the church walked into the boys room and made accusations about what she had seen. The Uncle was then arrested, with no rights read and taken into custody. There was never any investigation whatsoever. The Uncle was forced into a plea deal with a threat that if he did not take it, then the child would be removed from the family and taken into child protective services.
A plea deal was made due to the threat given, as the Uncle did not want to hurt the family any more. No family showed up at his sentencing or even came to his defense, because they are a broken family. Only his girlfriend at the time showed up. They are now married.
So after serving a year or so in prison, he was let out on parole. He finished his parole and all other requirements, living life as a registered sex offender.
A couple days ago, we were at a pool swimming and three cops show up with an arrest warrant. He was arrested for not registering the right address. Now he faces another sentencing. This guys life if ruined. Can he sue the state for wrongful conviction in the first place, with no physical evidence to go on and no investigation involved?

[Hool1Gan]

Working as a federal law enforcement officer, I can tell you it will be an uphill battle if not a losing one... but indeed it is a fact that he was wrongfully accused and convicted, I would fight it till the very end if I were him. The major problem he is now facing, is having a new charge and the fact that too much time may have elapsed from his original charges. Unless he filed an appeal to begin with, this will gain him a huge step in the right direction. I would hate to bring the boy into this kind of situation, but perhaps he is a little older and can be questioned about his uncle ever treating him wrong or differently. Kids can be manipulated and coached, but there are known methods of getting the truth from them without compromising the child's progress in case of incident, or otherwise exposing the child to the subject. I have no love or consideration for child abuse, especially of sexual nature... but even with an imperfect justice system, the truth comes out. I for one know how it feels to have no one to turn to. And I know all to well how it feels to be the only to turn to. Forget the idea of suing the state or anyone else for that matter. His cause must be driven only by his desire for justice, otherwise he has failed before he has even begun. If his innocence is proven, he will receive retributions for the damages. Of course, nothing can or will ever make it right. Then again, the same can be said for a child who has suffered this kind of abuse. I do however, believe that you and his wife are sticking it out with him because you believe in him... I may be a skeptic, but my curiosity lies with your efforts. I hope I was helpful. "...and justice for all."

[AK lawyer]

... ... Can he sue the state for wrongful conviction in the first place, with no physical evidence to go on and no investigation involved?

No. He pled guilty. He can't now successfully sue the state because, in the eyes of the law, he is guilty.

If he had wanted to contest the fact that he did the crime, it would have had to be before he made the plea, not after.

[ScottGem]

AK is correct. Since he pleaded guilty, there is no "wrongful conviction". Cops make threats to get a conviction all the time. If your friend talked to police without benefit of counsel then he acted foolishly.

BTW, being read one's rights is misunderstood. There is no requirement that rights be read. However, if rights are not read then anything said can't be used in court..

[Hool1Gan]

There you have it. AK an SCOTT just broke it down for us. Didn't his attorney tell him this?

[Fr_Chuck]

There was no wrongful conviction, in fact it looks like it was done properly, You are telling the story from your side or view which is of course tainted.

1. There was a witness and report
2. He agreed to the charges and accepted a plea deal, so at that point he admitted he was guilty, so he was not wrongfully convicted, he accepted guilt
3.He gave up all of his rights to appeal when he plead guilty.
4. He did not have to accept a plea deal. Guess what police and the DA lie to you about evidence and what they can do to you to get you to confess. If he was not guility he should not have accepted the plea. Once he accepted the plea, he accepted the fact he was guilty.
5. no people are not read their rights when they are arrested. They are only read their rights before they are questioned. And if they are questioned without having their rights read, then all that means is that what is told, can not be used in trial. *** IE this does not matter since it was a plea deal, had they went to trial and he had never been read his rights, anything he said could have been thrown out.

And where or who came up with the silly idea of suing the state ? He confessed, he accepted the plea deal there is not any wrongful conviction, he admitted his guilty when he accepted a plea deal.

Now he is and will be a registered sex offender for the rest of his life, something else he accepted with the plea deal.
He knew he has to register and refused to I assume.
So now he will be senteced for this new violation.

So to the legal system, and to the world, he has admitted guilt, does not matter if he is or was guilty of the crime, only the child knows that but he admitted it in court, accepted the plea and now has the mark of guilt on him for the rest of his life.

There is nothing he can do, except start following the rules of a sex offender