Habeas Corpus Filing

(Summary of the Federal Petition Challenging Murray’s Conviction)

The federal habeas corpus petition asks the United States District Court to review constitutional violations that the State of Alabama refused to address. This filing marks the start of federal oversight and is the first time an impartial court has been asked to examine the suppressed forensic evidence, the conflicts of interest, and the procedural failures that shaped Murray Lawrence Jr’s conviction.

What the Habeas Petition Challenges

The petition argues that Murray was denied due process and a fair trial because the State hid a second autopsy performed by the Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences, conducted six weeks after the Mississippi autopsy, and never disclosed to the defense. The State admitted this in its own filings.

The Mississippi autopsy documented death by ligature strangulation. The Alabama autopsy found no evidence of a gunshot wound, documented missing cervical vertebrae and missing neck structures, and confirmed that decomposition made the determination of a gunshot impossible. This directly contradicted the prosecution’s gunshot theory used at trial.

Why This Evidence Matters

The habeas petition explains that this suppressed evidence was material, undermined the prosecution’s theory, and would have changed the outcome of the trial. It also proves that the district attorney who prosecuted the case was the same judge who authorized the secret exhumation, which created an unresolvable conflict of interest the State tried to cure only after the Rule 32 petition was filed.

How the State Responded at the State Level

The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals denied relief and upheld the trial court’s dismissal, stating that the second autopsy did not qualify as newly discovered evidence and that it added nothing new to the case.

The Alabama Supreme Court then denied certiorari without issuing an opinion.

This exhausted all state remedies and moved the case into federal jurisdiction.

What the Federal Court Must Now Decide

The habeas petition asks the federal court to rule on:
• the State’s suppression of critical forensic evidence
• the constitutional impact of hiding a second autopsy
• the conflict of interest involving the district attorney
• the denial of an evidentiary hearing in state court
• whether the conviction can stand without the hidden forensic information ever being presented
• whether these violations undermine confidence in the verdict

The petition explains that no court has ever reviewed these constitutional violations on their merits.

Where the Case Stands Today

With the State Supreme Court’s denial, federal review is now active. The habeas petition and its exhibits form the backbone of that review. This is also where the new Rule 32.1(b) jurisdiction filing becomes crucial. Jurisdiction was never adjudicated in state court. The federal court cannot ignore a void judgment, and the new jurisdiction filing provides the record the federal court must consider.

All documents in this section are linked for public review.