Following an extensive review and investigation by the San Francisco District Attorney’s Innocence Commission, District Attorney Chesa Boudin announces the exoneration of Joaquin Ciria for being wrongly convicted of killing Felix Bastarrica.
Ciria, who is now 61 years old, was arrested 32 years ago and has maintained his innocence from the beginning. New evidence presented by Ciria’s counsel provided convincing proof that Ciria was convicted on the basis of false testimony for another man’s crime. Ciria’s case was the first one reviewed by the Innocence Commission since its formation. Monday, the court vacated his conviction and the District Attorney’s Office dismissed the case against him.
“Our office is proud of and grateful for the work of the Innocence Commission in rectifying the wrongful conviction of Mr. Ciria,” said Boudin. “Wrongful convictions continue to plague our justice system at great cost to the families, victims, and accused persons whose lives are devastated when the wrong person is convicted of a crime. Prosecutors have a duty to promote justice and correct injustices. Mr. Ciria spent more than 30 years in prison for a crime he did not commit. Although we cannot give him back the decades of his life lost we are thankful that the court has corrected this miscarriage of justice.”
The Innocence Commission is made up of a panel of experts appointed by the District Attorney: Retired Judge LaDoris Cordell; Professor Lara Bazelon; Dr. George Woods; San Francisco District Attorney Chief of Post-Conviction Unit Arcelia Hurtado; and San Francisco Deputy Public Defender Jacque Wilson. The Commission reviews and reinvestigates cases involving possible wrongful convictions upon referral by the District Attorney’s Office. If the Commission, after its review, votes by a majority to vacate the conviction, the Commission makes a recommendation to the District Attorney and provides a memorandum consisting of findings of fact and conclusions of law to assist the District Attorney in his determination. Boudin independently reviews the Commission’s investigation and retains the final decision-making power in each case.
Joaquin Ciria’s Case
In 1991, Ciria was convicted of the 1990 shooting death of Mr. Bastarrica. Though no physical evidence linked Ciria to the crime, San Francisco police inspectors zeroed in on Ciria as the shooter based on rumors on the street and statements of the getaway driver, George Varela.
At trial, the jury heard three eyewitnesses identify Ciria as the shooter, two of which were cross-racial identifications by strangers whose views were compromised by distance and poor lighting during the late-night shooting. Most crucial was the identification made by Varela, who knew Ciria and testified—in exchange for complete immunity—that he drove Ciria to and from the scene. What the jury did not hear, however, was evidence of the extreme pressure police exerted on Mr. Varela—who was a teenager at the time—to identify Ciria as the shooter or face charges himself. The jury heard no evidence of an alternate suspect, and no evidence that Ciria had an alibi, though two alibi witnesses were available and willing to testify.
As the Innocence Commission learned in the course of its investigation, another eyewitness—who was the victim’s best friend and knew all the parties involved—also witnessed the shooting and identified another person as the shooter. That witness had not testified at trial. Other witnesses confirmed details that corroborate the account of this new eyewitness, including the descriptions of the shooter initially provided by the stranger eyewitnesses, which more closely match the alternate suspect and do not match Ciria.
If this case were to be tried today, the jury would also hear from two witnesses close to Varela—one, his sister, the other, a close family friend—who say that Varela has since admitted to them that Ciria was not the shooter and that Varela testified falsely at trial. Finally, a jury today would hear from two alibi witnesses who can account for Ciria’s whereabouts at the time of the crime and who have maintained his innocence for more than 30 years.
The Commission’s Investigation
The Commission’s investigation included interviews of key witnesses; consultation with Mitchell Eisen, an expert in eyewitness identification; and a thorough examination of the San Francisco Police Department’s file, the District Attorney’s file, and the trial record relating to this case. Extensive efforts were also made to notify the victim’s family and provide support through the process, but no victim next of kin were located.
Following the Commission’s investigation, the Commission unanimously agreed that key evidence presented at trial in support of Ciria’s conviction was not credible, that Ciria had presented new evidence that would have more likely than not changed the outcome at trial, and that this new evidence was of such decisive force and value that it undermined the entire prosecution case and pointed unerringly to Ciria’s innocence.
“When a conviction is a perversion of justice because it deprives an innocent person of his freedom while robbing the victim and his family of justice, the District Attorney has a duty to correct that intolerable violation,” said Lara Bazelon, the Chair of the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office’s Innocence Commission. “The Innocence Commission members are proud to have been able to assist San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin in carrying out that all-important mission, and we wish Mr. Ciria and his family all the best as they move forward with their lives.”
In light of the Commission’s investigation, and following District Attorney Boudin’s independent review of the Commission’s findings, the District Attorney’s Office filed a concession in Ciria’s case, agreeing that the cumulative weight of the newly discovered evidence he presented undermines the prosecution’s case and that Mr. Ciria is factually innocent. The case was presented to the court on behalf of the District Attorney and the Innocence Commission by Arcelia Hurtado, Chief of the Post Conviction Unit at the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office, and on behalf of Ciria by Paige Kaneb and Melissa O’Connell of the Northern California Innocence Project and by attorney Ellen Eggers.
On Monday, the court vacated Ciria’s conviction. After the conviction was vacated, the District Attorney’s Office dismissed the case and Ciria was ordered released.
The Problem of Wrongful Convictions
Wrongful convictions remain a significant problem in the United States—and California is no exception. Since the National Registry of Exonerations began tracking wrongful convictions in 1989, there have been more than 270 known wrongful convictions in California—causing innocent Californians to lose a total of 2,104 years of their lives, and costing California tax-payers over $275 million. Studies on the causes of wrongful convictions demonstrate that key contributing factors include mistaken eyewitness identification, false testimony, and official misconduct. All three of those factors were present in Ciria’s case and led to his wrongful conviction in this case. Ciria will be added to the National Registry of Exonerations.
The San Francisco District Attorney’s Innocence Commission represents a first-in-the-nation approach to fulfilling the district attorney’s duty to rectify wrongful convictions. Though a growing number of district attorney’s offices across the county and in California have formed Conviction Integrity or Conviction Review Units with the intention of re-examining questionable convictions, many of these units have failed to fulfill their stated purpose because they lack resources, flexibility, transparency, and—perhaps most crucially—independence in the review process.
Moreover, post-conviction cases, like Ciria’s, where an incarcerated person alleges that they have been wrongfully convicted can take years to investigate and litigate through the traditional adversarial process. By contrast, the Innocence Commission’s independence from the district attorney’s office, along with its collaborative investigative model, and reliance on the pro bono service of Commission members—each of whom represents a key perspective in the criminal legal system—allows the Commission to efficiently and fairly review claims of wrongful conviction on behalf of the district attorney.
The California legislature hopes to build on and replicate the success of the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office’s Innocence Commission through Assembly Bill 2706, sponsored by Assemblymember Marc Levine and co-sponsored by Boudin.
Republished courtesy of the S.F. DA's Office.