In 2005 my client, James Ochoa, was convicted of carjacking and armed robbery in the state of California, tried, and found guilty. However, new evidence shows that he is actually innocent of the crimes he has been found guilty of. To begin, eyewitness misidentification led to his conviction in 2005. Additionally, unvalidated and improper forensic science also resulted in Ochoa’s unfortunate conviction. Finally, government misconduct resulted in the arrest of my client Ochoa.

Eyewitness misidentification led to his conviction in 2005. The Victims said my client looked like the man who committed the crime but they never said he was the man. If someone says that a person looks like another person you can not assume that’s the same person and that’s what happened to my client. There was a dog that the police brought to the scene. The dog took an hour to get to my client’s front door. Do you really know if the dog followed the scint to my client’s front door? No right!! Why would a dog take one hour to get to my client’s front door if the scene was only two blocks away? If the dog didn't really did not followed the scent to my client’s front door, then that means that my client was accused of something he didn’t do.

Additionally, unvalidated and improper forensic science also resulted in Ochoa’s unfortunate conviction. The black baseball hat, grey shirt, BB gun, and the Jetta’s steering wheel cover which were the things recovered from the stolen Jetta were all sent to the Orange County Crime Laboratory. My client was eliminated as a possible contributor to DNA. However my client was arrested. The government arrested my client, and they had DNA tests that say that my client is not the person that committed the crime.

Finally, government misconduct resulted in the arrest of my client Ochoa. According to news reports, prosecutors attempted to exert pressure on a crime lab analyst who conducted the tests that exonerated my client. The prosecutor didn’t want the people to know that they arrested the wrong person. The Orange County Weekly reported that a deputy district attorney contacted the lab and asked an analyst to change her report. To indicate that Ochoa could have been the perpetrator.

The prosecution feels that my client is guilty because of false confessions. However, this claim is inaccurate for several reasons. The judge told my client that if he didn’t say that he was guilty they were going to sentence him 25 years to life in prison if a jury found him guilty, and against his attorney’s advice, my client accepted a plea bargain in December 2005 that led to a sentence of two years in prison.

In 2005 my client, James Ochoa, was convicted of carjacking and armed robbery in the state of California, and found guilty. He was found guilty because of eyewitness misidentification, improper forensic science and government misconduct. This false verdict upsets my client and myself because he has a family at home that miss him and if he stays in jail he won't have a chance of having a job or enjoying his life.