| First Name | Leonard |
| Last Name | McSherry |
| Year of Conviction | 1988 |
| Year of Exoneration | 2001 |
| Testing inculpated culprit | Cold Hit |
| State of Conviction | California |
| Trial, Bench Trial, or Guilty Plea | Trial |
| Type of Crime | Rape |
| Death Sentence | No |
| Gender of Exoneree | Male |
| Race of exoneree | White |
| Juvenile | No |
| Type of Innocence Defense |
|
| Description / Quotes from Testimony Concerning Defense | ● Defendant’s father testified that he called home and spoke with his son, who was painting his house on the evening when the crime occurred. |
| Did the defendant testify at trial? | No |
| Types of evidence at trial |
|
| Type of Forensic Evidence |
|
| Types of Flawed Forensics |
|
| Reason why invalid | (2) Failure to exclude |
| Brief Quote / Description of Testimony | The analyst testified that although one of the stains had A activity which excluded the defendant, that the result was inconclusive, because “based on my experience,” that result could be the result of “bacterial contamination” although no tests were conducted to examine that conjecture. |
| Identity of eyewitness |
|
| Multiple eyewitnesses | 3 |
| Lineup Procedures |
|
| Suggestive Procedures | Yes ● Suggestive remarks – leading questions to eyewitness |
| Quotes from testimony #1 | Officer described how police posed leading questions to the 7 year-old victim: “We were trying – – the child was under a lot of strain and stress, so we were not asking her direct questions like you are asking. They were more kind of trying to help her go along with what we were trying to emphasize.” |
| Unreliable Identification? | Yes ● Initial nonidentification – eyewitness initially picked filler, as did victim ● Discrepancies in description – age, facial hair |
| Quotes from testimony #2 | Officers ignored victim’s initial descriptions – “We knew she was confused and did not put too much credibility to anything she was saying.” Victim said that the attacker was older than her father and even “Older than grandpa” where the defendant was in his 30’s. Officer testified, “At that time, we began walking down the hall, and then [the victim] did speak to me. Q. What did she say? A. [the victim] spontaneously said, ‘I wrote number six, but the stranger was number three.’” |
| Highest level reached | State Post Conviction |
| Claims Raised During All Appeals and Postconviction |
|
| Harmless Error Rulings |
|
| Citations to judicial opinions | People v. McSherry, 14 Cal.Rptr.2d 630 (Cal.App. 2 Dist. 1992) |