Adnan Syed’s reinstated conviction and next steps explained

The case of Adnan Syed is a high-profile crime that has remained unsolved for the past two years due to complex appeals procedures regarding victims’ rights. His conviction was quashed In the 2022 murder case of Hae Min Lee, the Court of Appeal overturned the conviction; Reinstate his conviction A few months later. Now, after hearing arguments from all sides, the Maryland Supreme Court has upheld Syed’s reconviction.

At issue was whether Lee’s brother, Young Lee, had received adequate notice ahead of a 2022 hearing to overturn Syed’s conviction. The hearing lasted just minutes, with Lee signing an agreement to enter the courtroom via Zoom. Requests made directly by victims or their families are rare, but this one was successful. Two courts continuous It was found that Lee did not have sufficient time to prepare for the hearing or to attend it in person.

The state Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that the decision to evacuate quickly was “Doing the wrong thing” Targeting Lee.

Because the issue concerned the rights of victims’ families to be present, rather than the actual question of whether Syed was guilty (a decision the court ultimately appeared to have ruled in his favor), upholding his conviction was largely procedural. That means it likely won’t affect the ultimate outcome of Syed’s case. Officially dropped the charges In 2022, his conviction was overturned, and then for a brief period he was charged again, based on new DNA testing on Hae Min’s clothing that showed four different people, none of whom matched Syed.

Yet the back-and-forth over Lee Young’s rights is important: It serves as a reminder to courts to prioritize victims’ rights — even in cases where wrongful convictions are possible.

For ordinary bystanders, Said released from prison The long-awaited theme of the revolutionary first season Serial Ultimately, Syed was cleared of the 1999 murder of his ex-girlfriend, Lee, in September 2022. The effort to clear his name was led in part by the Baltimore District Attorney’s Office after a special case review uncovered new evidence, including two new suspects, that cast reasonable doubt on his trial and conviction. A few days later, prosecutors dropped all charges against Syed.

Yet the circumstances that led to Syed’s release were rather unusual: a new case review culminated in years of exhausting appeals and a review that stemmed from a broader effort to enact desperately needed reforms to Baltimore’s criminal justice system and sentencing process. The circumstances were so unusual, in fact, that they appear to have led to a rather unusual exclusion: The victim’s family was given little time to prepare for the hearing.

Haemin’s brother, Lee Young, who is representing the victims, was given just one day’s notice to prepare for the hearing, including arranging transportation to and from Baltimore. Appeal decisionthe lower court initially assumed that Lee would attend the hearing via a Zoom link — but Lee apparently only agreed to attend the hearing via Zoom out of necessity, because he did not have time to prepare to appear in person.

“I’ve never heard of a victim’s family being contacted the day before the crime,” said former Brooklyn D.A. Julie Rendelman “If there are any issues, we usually let them know in advance. They track the process well before the hearing even takes place,” he told Vox.

Lee “wanted more time because he wanted the opportunity to speak with counsel and get a better understanding of what the evidence was that supported Syed’s innocence,” she said. “But he wasn’t able to do that in time, so at the last minute, he called via Zoom. So the question is whether that was enough advance notice.”

The court ruled that this was not the case. On Tuesday, March 28, the appeals panel voted 2-1 to overturn the previous annulment and temporarily reinstate Syed’s conviction. The court stayed the new sentence for 60 days, meaning it will not take effect for two months to give the prosecution and defense in Syed’s case time to adjust to the reinstated sentence.

In effect, the stay of execution spared Syed from going back to jail. Instead, it required a rerun of the original September hearing on the motion to remove — a hearing the appeals court said was necessary so that the victim’s family could be present in person.

Rendelman told Vox that victims’ families rarely file such appeals, and that it’s rare for such rulings to be granted. “At the same time,” she stressed, “it’s also rare that the families of the victims aren’t notified.”

“It is absurd that the prosecutors did not contact the families ahead of time to let them know about the upcoming hearings and that the alleged killer of their loved one could be released from prison.”

She noted that while the court’s motion was largely technical, it does raise questions about the role of technology in the modern criminal justice environment. “It’s interesting,” Rendelman said, “because we’re really in a different era than we were three years ago, when Zoom had become an acceptable form of participation in court proceedings.” However, the appeals court noted that not only were Lee’s family members given short notice, but all other involved parties were able to attend in person, creating an unfair situation.

“The only exception is that he didn’t want to use Zoom and he wasn’t given any time to show up,” she said of Lee.

Still, the fact that the victims’ families appealed directly to the state appears to be a sticking point for some in the criminal justice community. “In this case, victims’ rights advocates are seeking to expand rights that they already have in our criminal justice system,” said Doug Colbert, a University of Maryland professor who was one of Syed’s original attorneys. Tell WMAR “They say crime victims should have essentially the same rights and role as prosecutors,” he said ahead of an appeal hearing in February. He described any ruling in favor of Lee’s family as “extraordinary.”

But Rendelman noted that Lee’s family isn’t actually asking for more power — just to exercise their right to be present. “They’re not asking for any control over the decision; they just want to be present, which is something they have the right to do. The law doesn’t require them to have a say in what happens. The law just requires them to be present.”

“Those who disagreed with the ruling questioned whether victims should have such a big say in criminal proceedings. But the other side scored a considerable victory because their position was that the rights of victims should be respected, especially in cases like this where they have lost family members for 20 years, and they wanted some transparency in how the hearings were conducted.”

Since prosecutors have already decided to drop all charges against Syed, it is unlikely that anything will change the outcome of the rehearing and vacate his conviction. In fact, such hearings, while rare, would not even be likely to make the news if the families involved were not so highly profiled.

“If this had nothing to do with Adnan Syed, this story wouldn’t be in the newspapers,” Rendelman said. “Every victim’s family deserves the same respect regardless of the case.”

The decision to grant Young Lee’s request for a hearing was not unanimous; the Court of Appeal 2-1 Split The Maryland Supreme Court was split 4-3 on the issue, with Justice Michele D. Hotten dissenting. writing“This case is a program zombie”, and “meaningless theory” – Procedural rulings On the practical significance of the appeal – “designed to prevent this kind of judicial witchcraft.” In effect, Horton argued that any arguments by the High Court about Lee’s standing were superfluous now that the decision to quash Syed’s conviction had already been made.

What happens next? At this point, Syed will likely not go to jail until a hearing on his release is rescheduled in 2022, and this time, Yang Lee will be in court. In summary, while Syed’s conviction remains in effect, there is nothing to suggest that Yang Lee’s ability to attend and participate in a new hearing on the motion to vacate would change the already determined outcome. If that were to happen, it would be an extremely unusual and unprecedented moment in an already highly unusual case.

Update: August 30, 12:45 p.m. ET: This article was originally published on March 29, 2023. It has been updated to reflect the latest court decision in the Syed case.