Ronald Cotton

• Alibi
• Third Party Guilt

● Nine witnesses testified that defendant was home at the time of the crime. ● As evidence supporting third party guilt, witness testified that man fitting description of perpetrator worked across the street from the gym where victim worked.

He testified only in his second trial, for which I was unable to obtain a transcript. He describes testifying in an interview with Frontline: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/fron tline/shows/dna/interviews/cotton.html

• Eyewitness
• Forensic Evidence

• Fingerprint
• Serology

• Valid

The analyst described a B substance foreign to the victim, while the defendant had an O type. The boyfriend of the victim was "AB" and the analyst explained that the AB substances could have come from the boyfriend: "I really dont have anything to incriminate or to eliminate Mr. Cotton." The analyst excluded the defendant from having left A-type stains in second case.

• Cross Racial Identification
• Victim

• Lineup

Yes ● Suggestive remarks

Victim later recounted that “When I picked him out in the physical lineup and I walked out of the room, they looked at me and said, ‘That’s the same guy,’ I mean, ‘That’s the one you picked out in the photo.’ For me that was a huge amount of relief.”

Yes ● Initial nonidentification (one victim at line-up could not decide between two people and second victim could not identify) ● Discrepancies in description – composite looked unlike defendant, and also scars not mentioned

And at the conclusion of that first time through at that lineup, isn’t it true that you told Detective Gauldin, quote, ‘It is between #4 and #5’? A: Yes, I told him that for certain reasons

• State Law Evidence Claim

• State Law Evidence Claim

• G
• HE

State v. Cotton, 351 S.E.2d 277 (N.C. 1987), State v. Cotton, 394 S.E.2d 456 (N.C. App. 1990)
State v. Cotton, 407 S.E.2d 514 (N.C. 1991)