Michigan AG Creates Wrongful Imprisonment Board

MICHIGAN —Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has established a four-member Wrongful Imprisonment Compensation Act (WICA) Board to review requests and make recommendations on key decisions in the litigation of certain cases. Once cases meet the legal standard of wrongful conviction, the Act ensures exonerees are provided appropriate compensation for the harm they suffered, Nessel explained.

“These cases are complex and weave together the skill sets of criminal prosecution, criminal defense and civil litigation to ultimately decide whether or not an individual is entitled to compensation,” Nessel said. “It is critically important this board have representation from each of those skill sets to make certain we review all aspects of a case, from every legal angle, before awarding or denying compensation.”

Nessel appointed Michigan Solicitor General Fadwa Hammoud, a career prosecutor; Operations Chief Christina Grossi, a career civil litigator; Conviction Integrity Unit Director Robyn Frankel, a former criminal defense attorney; and Criminal Appellate Division Chief John Pallas, a former career prosecutor, to the WICA Board.

How it works

Nessel established a protocol to ensure all claims undergo a thorough and systematic assessment before a decision is rendered, her office said. While not every case is entitled to relief under WICA, the protocol provides for a timely resolution where compensation is warranted, recognizing the immense material and psychological barriers wrongfully imprisoned individuals experience upon their release, officials explained. The protocol also safeguards the integrity of the review process by establishing a standard to prevent conflicts and ensure proper communication between parties.

Under WICA, a plaintiff is entitled to compensation if he/she can show: 1) new evidence demonstrates that the plaintiff did not perpetrate the crime and was not an accomplice or accessory; 2) the new evidence resulted in the reversal or vacation of the charges; and 3) the new evidence resulted in either the dismissal of all charges or a finding of not guilty on all charges on retrial.