Convicting the Innocent
DNA Exonerations Database

Danny Brown

First Name Danny
Last NameBrown
Year of Conviction1982
Year of Exoneration2001
Testing inculpated culpritCold Hit
State of ConvictionOhio
Trial, Bench Trial, or Guilty PleaTrial
Type of CrimeRape and Murder
Death SentenceNo
Life / LWOP sentenceLife
Gender of ExonereeMale
Race of exonereeBlack
Type of Innocence Defense
  • Alibi
Description / Quotes from Testimony Concerning Defense

● A series of friends and relatives testified that defendant was across town with friends, at a store, and then at home, when victim was killed. ● Owner of the house that defendant was cleaning, verified that he came over to use phone around 7:30 p.m.

Did the defendant testify at trial?Yes
Quotes from Exoneree Testimony

When asked why the victim’s 3-year old child identified him as the assailant, defendant testified, “I can only say I don’t know what is in [the victim’s child’s] heart, you know, [he] is a child, you don’t know what could have motivated him to say what he could have said, but I know for sure that [he] is mistaken.”

Types of evidence at trial
  • Eyewitness
  • Forensic Evidence
Type of Forensic Evidence
  • Fingerprint
Types of Flawed Forensics
  • Valid (Excluded)
Brief Quote / Description of Testimony

The analyst testified that the latent print from the victim’s apartment did not match either the victim or the defendant.

Identity of eyewitness
  • Intraracial Identificaiton
  • Non-victim
Lineup Procedures
  • Photo array
  • Showup
Suggestive Procedures

Yes – Acquaintance – son of victim had met Brown because he had briefly dated victim However, photo array contained only three other individuals on back side (four were on each side) A show-up was then conducted at the police station. Police said this was done because defendant’s alibi witnesses had insisted that a mistake must have been made. Officer described that “a decision was made to allow this –one-on-one, I will call it,” although the two alibi witnesses were present in the room.

Unreliable Identification?

No – Although inconsistent on whether there was a second man, an accomplice.

Quotes from testimony #2

Q. Now, did you ever tell [Detective Marx] that you saw the other man standing in the living room with Danny? A. (Witness nodded affirmatively.) Q. Huh? A. Yes. Q. Did you ever tell him that the guy was standing there while Danny was choking your mom? A. Yes. . . . Q. Now you also told everybody here today that there was nobody with Danny; that he was all by himself. You said that, didn’t you? A. Yes. Q. So it’s got to be wrong somewhere, doesn’t it? A. (Witness nodded affirmatively.) Q. So when you looked at whatever you saw, did you just see for a second? A. Yes. Q. Or a long time? A. See for a second. Q. For a second? You peeked? A. Yes. Q. And you ran back upstairs? A. Yes. Q. So is it true or is it fair to say, Jeffery, that whatever you were looking at, you didn’t look at it very long at all, you just looked at it a real short time? A. Yes.

Highest level reachedState Post­ Conviction
Claims Raised During All Appeals and Postconviction
  • Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
  • Jackson Claim
  • Jury Misconduct
Harmless Error Rulings
  • G
  • HE
  • OG
Citations to judicial opinions

State v. Brown, 1983 WL 6945 (Ohio App. 6 Dist. 1983
State v. Brown, 660 N.E.2d 1173 (Ohio 1996)