There was no conviction and the case was dismissed.
203602
It depends on the state.  Normally arrest records aren't seen by the public and therefore aren't cleaned.  Regardless of if you were convicted you WERE ARRESTED.  Some states do allow it to be purged, but not all.  Speak with a lawyer or call your local law bar, they'll probably be able to give you some free basic info on your area, and for a fee help you get it done.
421351
It depends on where the case is tried...if it is tried in California or New York then the judge will sympathize with the defendants because they have no past criminal records...if it is tried in Texas or Georgia then the judge will show them the same mercy that they showed their victim....none, regardless of their record.
372783
Say not guilty and explain the situation.  If that does not work, work on a plea deal that will get it expunge after 6 month or a year of not getting into trouble.  Yes get a lawyer
663006
The court does not solicit them and they are not paid. They are briefs filed by people who have an interest in the outcome of the case, but have no official standing to argue before the court, because they are not a party to the suit at hand.
651246
There is no yes/no answer to your question.\n\nOnly your friend's attorney is in a position to give you specific advice.\n\nAnything that causes the prosecution to produce evidence would seemingly help the defendant. But, only if the evidence exonerates him.
226777
The prosecutor would have had to have known that the exculpatory evidence existed for a reprimand to be appropriate.  If the prosecution knew of the vehicle but not its evidentiary value and withheld its existance (or its misplacement) from the defense, that would probably meet the test for misconduct and appropriate punitive action.  That action wouldn't help the accused, though.\n\nDisposal of potential evidence, exculpatory or otherwise, in a crimminal case would be highly unusual and is disturbing on its own.  \n\nA clever defense attorney would probably move for dismissal of the charges with prejudice based on the improper destruction of evidence, and probably use the issue to raise reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors if the case were not dismissed.\n\nIt's also possible that the judge could instruct the jury that the evidence actually does exist as claimed by the defense and to include that evidence in their deliberations.\n\nIf anything, this would get the issue on the trial record for use on appeal if necessary.
333943
It will show he was arrested.  Contact a lawyer about getting it expunged.
485619
There is no way of making that call with our hearing all of the evidence.  It is up to the jury to determine if the evidence was enough to convict.  Generally you do not base this decision on just one piece of evidence, but a combination of everything presented by both sides.  If you feel that the prosecution did not prove their case, then you need to acquit, as everyone is to be considered Innocent until PROOVEN guilty.  I hope that if I am ever falsly accused, I have an intelligent jury deciding my case.
305227
Cant get convictions expunged depends on the disposition of the case.
394722
It can continue.  The prosecution may not have been looking to surpress any affidavits, meaning that anything that was submitted by the defense will be allowed.
443443
In law, a conviction is the verdict that results when a court of law finds a defendant guilty of a crime.\n\nThe opposite of a conviction is an acquittal (i.e. "not guilty"). \nFor a host of reasons, the criminal justice system is not perfect and sometimes guilty defendants are acquitted while innocent people are convicted. Appeal mechanisms mitigate this problem to some extent. An error that results in the conviction of an innocent person is a miscarriage of justice.\n\nAfter a defendant is convicted, the court determines the appropriate sentence as a punishment. Further, the conviction may lead to results beyond the terms of the sentence itself, such as loss of federal education loans in the case of a drug felony. Such ramifications are known as the collateral consequences of criminal charges. Any punishment, simple or severe, for any crime committed is called convition-.
218055
nothing at all ? legal wise wasnt caught in the act and cant be booked on something that is law ? l
267598
There was a recent case on the news about a death row inmate who was locked up, but just got out because they proved it was another person who did it.  Robert Blake and OJ were not found innocent they were found not guilty which is two different things.  It means the state didn't meet their burden of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt).  If you are looking for cases which a person with a lot of evidence against them was found not guilty then their is plenty of cases.\nIf I were you I would focus my search on cases were there was lots of evidence, but were set free because of procedural issues.  That area is pretty interesting.
258402
This can be difficult, as there is no one complete archive of court records.  There is probably not even a record of where the records are!\n\nYou are best off starting at the local courts where you think the matter might have been heard.  This will be especially the case for civil matters.
604162
It goes back to the Salem witch trials in the late 1600's. People were charged, convicted and executed on the flimsiness of evidence or no evidence at all. Sometimes all that was need was for someone to accused them.
492527
It is pretty much impossible to say someone who was executed was actually innocent, because there is never another trial. However, the cases at the site below are very questionable.
149118
Was it a related charge?  ie 1st degree murder to 2nd degree murder?  Then there's no material change in the charges and it can proceed.  If they went from shoplifting to assault and battery though they'd have to give time to prepare a defense to that since that was not the orginial charge.