Civil procedure: remedies; wrongful imprisonment compensation act; modify evidence requirements. Amends secs. 2, 4, 5 & 7 of 2016 PA 343 (MCL 691.1752 et seq.).
The bill would significantly simplify the process for individuals wrongfully convicted to claim compensation. Compensation is regulated to ensure that for every year of wrongful imprisonment, a plaintiff may receive $50,000, with allowances for attorney fees that must not exceed a certain percentage of the total compensation. Furthermore, the acceptance of such compensation is designed to not imply any wrongdoing on the part of the state. This creates a more straightforward avenue for those wrongfully imprisoned to receive justice while ensuring the state is protected against undue claims related to previous convictions.
Senate Bill 0997 aims to amend the 2016 Wrongful Imprisonment Compensation Act, specifically targeting the criteria and procedures surrounding claims for compensation due to wrongful convictions in the state of Michigan. One significant change proposed is in the definition of 'new evidence,' which the bill now specifies must include evidence not previously presented during the conviction proceedings, such as DNA test results or new eyewitness testimonies, but not merely a witness’s recantation without supporting evidence. This change seeks to clarify and tighten the standards under which claims can be made, affecting how individuals can seek redress after wrongful conviction.
Notably, the bill specifies that compensation cannot be awarded for time incarcerated under other sentences or for injuries sustained while in prison. There are provisions for expungement of criminal records linked to wrongful convictions, which underscores the potential influence of this legislation on individuals' future job opportunities and rights. However, tying compensation to claims of child support debts could provoke debate about whether that might disincentivize claims among those who are financially burdened. Overall, the amendments could lead to debates on the interpretation of evidence standards and the appropriate balance between safeguarding the rights of the wrongfully imprisoned and protecting state interests.