Court Throws Out Wrongful Conviction Of Duval Man Imprisoned 7 Years, Says Jury Was "Deprived Of Hearing Critical Evidence"

By Laura Cassels, Florida Phoenix

July 29, 2021

A Duval County man wrongfully convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison for a 2013 armed robbery must get a new trial, an appellate court has ruled.

Dustin Duty, a client of the Innocence Project of Florida and Miami Law Innocence Clinic, has been in prison for seven years. He is incarcerated at Marion Correctional Institution in Marion County.

The unanimous ruling in the First District Court of Appeal overturns the conviction and orders a new trial in Duval County, though prosecutors could choose to drop the case and set Duty free.

Duty’s lawyers are asking prosecutors to drop the case, saying the appellate court correctly found “egregious errors” in his defense at trial – including failure to corroborate an alibi from his employer – which support Duty’s claim of innocence.

“As the [appellate] court concluded, trial counsel’s errors denied him the representation he deserved and deprived the jury of hearing critical evidence that proved Mr. Duty did not commit this crime,” said Craig Trocino, director of the Miami Law Innocence Clinic, in a joint statement.

“This case should not have been prosecuted in the first place. But the prosecution now has the chance to make it right by dropping this case and not attempting to retry it. We urge them to do just that,” said Seth Miller, executive director of the Innocence Project of Florida, in the joint statement.

Duty, now 36, was convicted of the armed robbery of a woman whose identification of him as the perpetrator was uncertain at the time and was influenced by police, the appellate court ruled. Also, the court found that Duty’s employer, who could have testified that Duty was at work at the time of the crime, wrongly was not called as a witness.

“Appellant [Duty] was not wearing the same clothes as the perpetrator, and neither the clothes alleged to have been worn, nor the money stolen, were ever located by officers,” the court ruled.

“Additionally, Appellant steadfastly claimed an alibi via Mr. Davis [his employer] which Appellant’s trial counsel failed to effectively investigate and present. Notably, the jury was searching for an alibi, submitting the following question after they began deliberations: ‘The victim stated her assailant was dressed as a construction worker. Was the defendant employed and did he have an alibi for the time involved?’”

This story was originally published by the Florida Phoenix. For more stories from the Florida Phoenix, visit FloridaPhoenix.com.