In 1993, at 19 years of age, Wilson Rivera was arrested, charged, and eventually convicted of two counts of murder. During the sentencing phase of his case, Wilson addressed the sentencing judge maintaining his innocence. Wilson asserted that his conviction was a consequence of perjuriously obtained testimony and fabricated evidence.
1. There were no eyewitness testimony identifying Wilson as one of the perpetrators of the crime. The sole eyewitness for the prosecutor testified that the perpetrator was 5’3″-5’5″, sounded white, and was wearing a poncho and a dark ski mask. Wilson is 5’10” with an accent.
2. Detroit Police failed to brush for fingerprints at the scene, although 5-6 shell casings were recovered and there was evidence that the perpetrator had touched the door jamb of the front door before forcing it open and gaining entrance to the house.
3. No murder weapon was ever recovered
4. Wilson never implicated himself. On the contrary, Wilson’s statement to the police contained his whereabouts during the hours that the crime was taking place.
5. Although various caliber ammunition was found where Wilson was arrested, none matched the caliber of the weapon used to commit the offense.
6. Wilson was placed under arrest a few hours after the homicides, he was never administered a gun-residue test, however, one was administered to the sole eyewitness.
7. The perpetrator left a clear shoeprint at the scene of the crime, but Detroit Police failed to look for a match once Wilson was arrested in his home.The Detroit Police suborned perjury
The prosecutor indulged in prosecutorial misconduct, which deprived Wilson of a fair trial
Detroit Police indulged in multiple acts of misconduct in order to ensure the charges against Wilson would stick
Defense counsel and appellate counsel proved ineffective.