NC innocence commission would be axed under Senate budget proposal
The North Carolina Senate budget proposal includes a plan to eliminate the Innocence Inquiry Commission, a state agency established in 2006 to investigate wrongful conviction claims.
Since 2007, the commission has reviewed over 3,600 claims of innocence and held 19 hearings. Fifteen individuals have been exonerated as a result of the commission’s investigations, according to its website.
Laura Pierro, the executive director of the commission, said she was “shocked and saddened” by the Senate proposal.
A 20-year career prosecutor and judge who left the bench to lead the commission, she highlighted North Carolina’s ingenuity in launching a model that remains the only one of its kind in the United States and one of only three in the world.
She said the agency has been trying repeatedly to meet with members of the Senate budget committee to explain its mission and value.
The commission investigates claims of actual innocence, but also pursues cases that confirm guilt, she said. One recent case led to a December 2024 conviction after the commission located a suspect, obtained a confession, and confirmed the individual’s identity as the true perpetrator through DNA evidence, she said.
“Our stories are numerous and our benefit to the North Carolina criminal justice system and constituency is invaluable,” she wrote.
“Our relevance has not ceased.”
Budget documents justifying the cut say that “other non-state entities provide similar opportunities for individuals to seek legal guidance and case review.”
Republican Sen. Danny Britt, the Senate judiciary committee chairman, echoed this rationale Tuesday when questioned by Senate Minority Leader Sydney Batch about the proposed elimination in the budget plan released Monday, and the fate of the commission’s 16 staff members.
Britt said lawmakers targeted the commission to reduce state spending after reviewing its efficiency and comparing its record to groups like the North Carolina Center on Actual Innocence. Britt did not immediately reply to a request for comment from The News & Observer.
Senate leader Phil Berger told reporters on Tuesday that it was explained to him that the commission has worked through a lot of cases of people who are in prison “who have contended that their convictions were somehow tainted.”
“And as I understand it, because of some reforms that actually are in place, you’re not having the newer cases with the same sorts of issues (as) some of the older cases, and that it kind of served its purpose,” he said.
“At this point in time, there are other avenues that are available — motions for appropriate relief and other things — within the courts to address some of the issues, and that in some respects is duplicative of some other things that would be available,” he said.
A postconviction motion for appropriate relief (MAR) is a legal tool used to challenge a conviction or sentence after a trial and appeals are over. Going through the commission is a separate legal method.
Work of the commission
The first and only state agency of its kind in the country, the commission independently investigates post-conviction innocence claims, referring cases to a three-judge panel for review.
Judges are appointed by the chief justice of the state Supreme Court, currently Republican Paul Newby. The judges consider evidence at a hearing and vote whether the person is innocent. A unanimous vote is required to dismiss the criminal charges.
In contrast, the North Carolina Center on Actual Innocence, a nonprofit, litigates cases — often via filings of motions for appropriate relief — and collaborates with law schools and attorneys.
Chris Mumma, executive director of the NC Center on Actual Innocence, who helped draft the legislation creating the innocence commission, said it was established for two primary reasons.
First, the commission can bypass procedural bars to allow a case to be heard. For example, Mumma said, if a defendant files their own motion claiming ineffective assistance of counsel, it may never be reconsidered, even if a qualified attorney wants to take on the case. But if no hearing was held on a prior ineffective counsel claim, the innocence commission can still review it.
The commission can also independently search for evidence — like rape kits, files, and fingerprints unavailable to defense attorneys — setting it apart, Mumma said. She noted this ability led to the exonerations of Willie Grimes, Edward McInnis, Joseph Sledge, Henry McCollum, and Leon Brown.
“We established the commission for specific reasons, and people don’t understand what those reasons are or that those problems still exist, so you can’t eliminate a solution without addressing the original problem,” she said.
Mumma added that the work of nonprofits and the Innocence Commission is many times interconnected.
In the case of Grimes — a Hickory man convicted in 1988 and sentenced to life in prison for a rape he didn’t commit — Mumma said the commission was able to locate fingerprints thought to be lost by reviewing files and working with police. Those prints identified the real perpetrator. Still, Grimes spent 25 years in prison. Mumma represented him before the three-judge panel that exonerated him.
“If the commission had not been able to go in and find those fingerprints, he never would have been exonerated,” she said.
Mumma said she supports improving the Innocence Commission, noting no panel has exonerated anyone since 2019. She’d like greater transparency and a less cumbersome process to reach a three-judge review.
The budget proposal is expected to pass the Senate by the end of the week. The House will then propose its own plan, and the two would have to agree on a budget before it could make its way to Democratic Gov. Josh Stein.
Bigger picture
For Mumma, the proposed elimination of the commission is part of a “bigger picture.”
Two bills — House Bill 307 and Senate Bill 429 — would limit the time to file a postconviction motion for appropriate relief to 120 days after an appeal ends.
The House bill is sponsored by Rep. Sarah Stevens, a Mount Airy Republican. The Senate bill is sponsored by Britt and Sens. Buck Newton and Warren Daniel, all Republicans.
Appeals are largely limited to what happened at trial and what’s in the record. Mumma said the majority of exonerations she’s obtained happened because new evidence was considered.
“There has never been a time limit for new evidence not known at the time of trial, including ineffective assistance of counsel, changes in science, recantations,” she said.
“The combination of eliminating the IIC and limiting relief through post-conviction motions sends a strong message that truth in justice is not a priority in North Carolina,” she said.
Prosecutors involved?
Mumma said it was her “firm belief” that the state’s Conference of District Attorneys is pushing for these changes. The conference represents all of North Carolina’s elected district attorneys.
Asked about the conference’s involvement, its president, Seth Banks — district attorney for the 35th Prosecutorial District — said the group “has not made any legislative request for the elimination of the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission.”
“The role of the 42 district attorneys across our state is to uphold the law and seek justice in each and every case that crosses our desks. Because of that, we continue to support any individual’s right to ask for the review of convictions through avenues provided under North Carolina law, including motions for appropriate relief and other statutory mechanisms. The conference remains committed to seeking the truth and to ensuring that the criminal justice system remains fair, accountable, and transparent,” he wrote.
The N&O has followed up on whether the conference is involved with the other legislation.
In 2023, The N&O reported that district attorneys hold significant sway with Republican leaders in the General Assembly, based on interviews and records.
One example: Cleveland County District Attorney Michael Miller emailed then-House Speaker Tim Moore in May 2021, writing, “I think it is time for us to ‘defund the IC.’ ” Miller also urged Moore to kill House Bill 901, which would have made it easier for people to seek reviews of their criminal convictions.
The commission wasn’t defunded, but the bill died in committee in 2023. Separately, a different bill passed that year made it harder to challenge convictions.
This story was originally published April 15, 2025 at 3:18 PM.
