Simpson Thacher, Innocence Project secure rare factual innocence finding

Almost a year after Jeremy Puckett was released from prison, after having served 18 years on a murder conviction, a pro bono team from Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP and the Northern California Innocence Project secured a rare declaration of factual innocence for him.

Harrison J. Frahn and attorneys from Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP joined with the Innocence Project in 2015 to work on the case.

"This case has given me two of the most meaningful moments in my 25-year legal career," Frahn said. "The first one in March, when the judge looked over and said, 'Mr. Puckett, you're a free man,' and last Friday when he said, 'Mr. Puckett, your innocence petition is granted and you are an innocent man.'"

Sacramento County Superior Court Judge < href="https://www.dailyjournal.com/judicial_profiles/8194">Steve White issued the declaration on Jan. 15 after reversing Puckett's conviction on March 3, noting no physical evidence tied him to the crime or the crime scene.

In the Northern California Innocence Project's 20-year history, it is only the second time that the organization has managed to win a declaration of factual innocence.

Puckett was sentenced to life in 2002 for the murder of Anthony Galati in 1998, who was found dead on the side of a road, shot twice in the head and covered in abrasions.

"Aside from our affirmative evidence, there was just an absolute lack of any evidence that the district attorney could bring that linked Jeremy to this crime in any way," Frahn said.

Puckett's writ of habeas corpus was denied. But the state Supreme Court ordered an evidentiary hearing in 2019. The superior court granted two of Puckett's claims and ordered a new trial, but his claim of factual innocence was not addressed at the time.

In March, Sacramento Assistant Chief Deputy District Attorney Rodney Norgaard issued a statement saying there was not sufficient evidence to retry Puckett and sustain the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

"Our ethical obligation as prosecutors requires that we move the court to dismiss the charges if we believe we do not have a reasonable probability of meeting that burden of proof," Norgaard said in an email. "Consequently, we requested that the court dismiss the charges based on insufficient evidence."

Norgaard added, "Based upon the standard of review for these proceedings, we accept the court's ruling on the matter."