Alvin Jardine has steadfastly maintained his innocence regarding a sexual assault involving a knife that allegedly took place in Maui, and after nearly twenty years of incarceration, a judge has finally allowed him the opportunity to seek proof of his innocence. His defense team sent a green and white checkered tablecloth discovered at the crime scene to a lab for DNA analysis. During the 1990 investigation, DNA testing on various bodily fluids found on the cloth yielded inconclusive results; however, advancements in technology by 2008 enabled a retesting that confirmed Jardine was not the source of the DNA. Consequently, Jardine’s conviction was overturned, leading to his release roughly three years later. Despite this, Jardine has been unable to secure compensation under a state law enacted in 2016 which provides up to $50,000 for each year of wrongful imprisonment because it demands proof of “actual innocence,” a burden considered exceedingly difficult to fulfill.
Legal experts, including defense attorneys as well as state supreme court justices, have noted that the standards for demonstrating actual innocence are nearly insurmountable. According to William Harrison, a lawyer advocating for another wrongly convicted individual, there’s a notable lack of case law regarding actual innocence. Cases in Hawaii, including that of Jardine, have remained unsettled as the Attorney General’s Office contests claims, asserting that none of the five individuals who have sought compensation have met this onerous standard. Currently, several of these cases are still pending, including two that have reached the Supreme Court.
A total of thirty-eight states have enacted similar compensation laws. While most require some proof of innocence, Jeffrey Gutman, a law professor, noted that Hawaii’s criteria are significantly stricter than those of many other states. Notably, Hawaii is the only state that has yet to compensate any claimants, although two other states have also not made any payments, due to a lack of claims being filed.
State Senator Karl Rhoads, who played a key role in the creation of the compensation law, has recently introduced another bill aimed at easing the process for wrongly imprisoned individuals to secure financial reparations. Rhoads emphasized the necessity of treating these individuals with empathy and compassion in light of their unique suffering.
When the compensation legislation was initially drafted in 2015, Jardine was among the individuals lawmakers aimed to support. Advocates, including representatives from the Hawaii Innocence Project, testified to the immense difficulties Jardine faced after spending twenty years behind bars. Jardine lost critical years of his daughter’s life and was discharged into an unfamiliar world, devoid of resources or support.
The opposing argument highlighted the importance of financial compensation being reserved solely for legitimately innocent individuals. The Attorney General’s Office previously contended that claimants should only receive compensation if their filings indicated grounds for overturning a conviction based on actual innocence. Questions arose over whether a mere flaw in the prosecution should suffice for compensation requests, as some other states had established precedents based on different criteria. Lawmakers eventually refined the language to mandate that claimants must substantiate their “actual innocence.” However, this new benchmark remains undefined within the law, presenting complications for claimants seeking compensation.
Under the established legal framework, aks judges to determine whether new evidence suggests a different verdict rather than formally declaring someone innocent. A Maui Circuit Court judge had earlier overturned Jardine’s convictions and called for a retrial, contending that recent DNA analysis was likely to result in a not-guilty verdict. However, prosecutors ultimately withdrew the charges rather than resubmit Jardine’s case for trial. When Jardine filed for compensation in 2016, the Attorney General’s Office claimed he failed to satisfy statutory requirements since the ruling for his release lacked explicit declarations of his “actual innocence.” Additionally, they argued that even if Jardine was excluded as the source of DNA found on the tablecloth, it did not rule him out as the perpetrator given the nature of the assault.
In 2023, Jardine’s legal team appealed to the state Supreme Court, which determined that a judge’s order need not feature specific language establishing innocence. Rather, the ruling should align with the notion of compensating individuals based on the facts of their cases. On this basis, the justices upheld the conclusion that Jardine must undergo another trial, this time a civil proceeding to determine his innocence and establish what compensation may be due to him.
As of now, the five claimants have not progressed towards resolution primarily due to the legal ambiguities regarding their petitions. Among those who have struggled to comply with the law’s parameters are brothers Albert Ian and Shawn Schweitzer, who had been convicted of a 1991 sexual assault and murder on the Big Island. Their convictions were overturned in 2023 after DNA analysis excluded them as potential suspects. Although another individual, Albert Lauro, was identified as the actual source of the DNA involved in the case and subsequently took his own life, the Schweitzers face persistent resistance from the Attorney General’s Office regarding their petitions for compensation.
Recent judicial findings indicated that the Schweitzers do not need to be declared “actually innocent” to advance their claims, but like Jardine, they must pursue a civil lawsuit. A status conference has been scheduled to set a trial date for their case, while Rhoads remains hopeful that the attention garnered will mobilize lawmakers to amend aspects of the statute. He proposed new legislation that would enable compensation claims based on judicial findings demonstrating that the individuals did not commit the crimes they were convicted of, eliminating the objectionable “actual innocence” requirement. Moreover, his bill would ensure that the state is mandated to provide interim support to affected individuals while their claims are being processed.
The fate of this proposed legislation remains uncertain, as some county prosecutor offices have refrained from taking a position, while others, including the Attorney General’s Office, declined to comment on pending bills. Concerns linger about an influx of claims from individuals seeking compensation based solely on the reversal of their convictions, which is what many state legislatures aim to mitigate through stringent provisions in wrongful conviction laws.
