RAYBIN & WEISSMAN, P.C. ATTORNEYS oy LAW David L. Raybin | David J. Weissman | Benjamin K. Raybin | Ashley Farrell September 29, 2016 Governor Bill Haslam State Capitol, 1" Floor 600 Charlotte Avenue Nashville, Tennessee 37243 RE: Executive Exoneration Mr. Lawrence McKii Dear Governor Haslam: Lawrence McKinney was judicially exonerated of rape by the Shelby County Criminal Court on July 17, 2009. The court and the district attorney agreed that DNA. evidence cleared Mr. Kinney. He was released from prison after serving thirty-one years for a crime he did not commit. State law gives you, as our governor, the authority to grant formal exoneration to “any person whom the governor finds did not commit the crime for which the person was convicted.” Pursuant to that statute, the undersigned attorneys submitted our request for executive exoneration of Mr. McKinney on December 2, 2015. The matter was referred to the Tennessee Board of Parole for a non-binding recommendation. After several months of inaction from the Board, a hearing was finally scheduled for September 28, 2016 after Mr. McKinney's state representative and state senator held a press conference. Although the Board recommended against exoneration, the “hearing” it condueted lacked basic tenants of fairness and due process necessary to make its recommendation reliable. Most fundamentally, the Board imposed a “clear and convincing” burden of proof for Mr. McKinney that simply does not exist in the statute. We disagree with that standard, since your ultimate decision is not restricted to that level of proof. The “hearing” exhibited procedural irregularities unlike any we have seen in our decades of practice before virtually every tribunal in the state, The Chairman of the Parole Board permitted another Member of the Board to conduct the hearing, but that Member was permitted to function as a prosecutor presenting evidence, cross-examining witnesses, and making argument against Mr. McKinney. Fifth Third Center, 424 Church Street, Suite 2120 | Nashville, Tennessee 37219 P 615-256-6666 | F 615-254-4254 | www.NashvilleTaLaw.comGovernor Bill Haslam September 29, 2016 Page 2 of 3 On at least one occasion, the Board Member made argument during his “questioning” of a witness that went on for some five minutes without asking any substantive question. That Board Member was then allowed to vote along with the other members of the tribunal. Perhaps most troubling, the Board Member acting as prosecutor restricted Mr. McKinney's attorneys from the ability to redirect witnesses, challenge his arguments, and introduce rebuttal proof. Mr. McKinney's attorneys repeatedly objected to these procedures and their inability to respond to the Board Member's obvious advocacy against Mr. McKinney. We were told we could make argument during closing statements, but by that time we were unable to introduce any new evidence or ask further questions of the witnesses. As a result of this unprecedented procedure the undersigned attorneys suggest that you should not rely upon the recommendation of the Parole Board because it resulted from proceedings ‘that were fundamentally flawed and devoid of the indicators of reliability we expect from fair and neutral decision-makers. We would not tolerate a hearing where one person is allowed to act as a judge, prosecutor, and witness; yet that is exactly what happened at the Parole Board “hearing.” The undersigned attorneys urge you to give weight to the judgment of our judicial system, which contains a time-tested series of checks and balances. It was that judicial system which found Mr. McKinney to be innocent of the crime—by the same legal standard the Parole Board decided to follow but ignore. To our knowledge there have only been three people who have ever been pardoned or exonerated and later compensated for unlawful confinement in the State of Tennessee, Each of these cases involved mistaken eyewitness identification by the victim. There was a mistaken identification of Mr. McKinney; DNA evidence cleared him of this terrible crime, thirty-one years too late While we hope that the number of wrongfully-convicted Tennesseans is few. surely there have been more than three. We believe there is a fourth: Mr. McKinney. The injustice of a false conviction is only made worse by a flawed process that fails to fully clear the names of those who lost their freedom for a crime they not commit.Governor Bill Haslam September 29, 2016 Page 3 of 3 We ask you to please rely on the attached judicial exoneration from the Shelby County Criminal Court and grant Mr. McKinney the relief he deserves as an innocent man. Respectfully Submitted, Raybin & Weissman, P.C. David L. Raybin ( Lowery Lowery & Cherry FA GL Koow deve ~< B. F. “Jack” Lowery, Attachment: Judicial Exoneration, 7-17-2009, Criminal Court of Shelby County ce: Mr. Lawrence McKinneyIN THE CRIMINAL COURT OF TENNESSEE AT MEMPHIS THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT DIVISION VIIL y ) LAWRENCE MCKINNEY, ) P- 06992 and P - 02175 Petitioner, ) SHELBY COUNTY ) Case Nos, B-60414, B-60415, S ) > mp TG STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) WHLUM BEES Respondent. ) Bt é Da ORDER ON MOTION TO REOPEN FIRST POST-CONVICTION PETITION PURSUANT TO TENN. CODE ANN. § 40-30-117 ‘This matter came on to be heard upon the motion of the Petitioner to reopen his first post-conviction petition pursuant to T.C.A. § 40-30-117 alleging the discovery of new scientific evidence that would exonerate him. New DNA testing has been concluded which excludes Petitioner as the person responsible for the crimes charged. Therefore, upon statement of counsel for both the Petitioner and the State, the evidence presented, and the entire record in this cause, this Court finds the motion well taken and the motion to reopen is hereby GRANTED. The petitioner has further moved this Court to vacate the judgments against bim based upon the scientific evidence heretofore presented, The parties agree and this Court does find that the testing of the DNA has exonerated the Defendant announced that if this evidence had been available at the time of the initial filing of this indictments there would have been no prosecution of the Petitioner. Therefore, the Petitioner's motion for post conviction relief is hereby GRANTED and his convictions are hereby VACATED.‘The Petitioner has been informed of the results of the testing and understands the effect this would have had on the prosecution of his case. Petitioner further understands that the State intends to enter an order of nolle prosequi on his indictments and he will be released from incarceration. Mental health resources ate available to Petitioner to assist him in his return to society. ‘The Petitioner has been provided contact information for himself of such services as needed. such services and is willing to ave IT IS SO ORDERED this 17" day of July, 2009. JUDGE CHRIS CRAFT DIVISION StI Approved for Entry: ‘Attorney for Petitioner