Estimated read time: 2-3 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY — A Logan woman who was released from prison after 17-years now waits for the Utah Supreme Court to decide if her original conviction will be upheld.
Last May, Debra Brown was found factually innocent for the 1995 murder of her friend and employer Lael Brown.
The attorney general's office is challenging the "factual innocence" ruling on this case, a ruling that gave Debra Brown her freedom after 17-years. Brown's case is the first to challenge the 2008 statue that allows individuals to challenge their convictions when new evidence is discovered.
The AG's office argued this morning that 2nd District Judge Michael DiReda granted Brown her freedom erroneously, basing his decision on old or incorrect evidence and not properly applying the new evidence under the statute's guidelines.
The new evidence presented at the May 2011 hearing included several witnesses who claimed they saw the victim, Lael Brown alive during a time frame the state claimed he had been shot dead.
"Judge DeRida decided that the witnesses were credible, and there was additional documentary evidence that showed they were credible, and showed Lael Brown was, in fact alive on Saturday afternoon and Saturday evening, during a period of time where a number of witnesses accounted for Deb Brown's whereabouts," said Alan Sullivan, attorney for Brown.
Assistant Attorney General Christopher Ballard told the Justices that just because someone claims they saw someone doesn't make it true. Ballard told the justices that Debra Brown "was the only person based on the evidence to have motive, access, and opportunity to commit the crime."
"The state hasn't changed its theory that she is the murder," Ballard said. "The thing that has changed is that she has produced new evidence that maybe it didn't happen Saturday morning, and the state's response is that it's not enough for you just to prove you didn't do it Saturday morning, you have to prove that you didn't do it anytime."
The justices are taking the appeal under consideration. It's unknown when they will have a decision. If they agree that Judge DiReda didn't apply the statute currently then Brown's original sentence will be upheld and then it will be up to Adult Probation and Parole to decide if she will go back to prison to finish serving her sentence.
