Dear John,
I’m writing to you with a rare and exciting update on one of our most outrageous cases challenging government abuse. In December, I told you how a three-judge panel at a federal appeals court reluctantly ruled against IJ client Erma Wilson, who is fighting for justice after being wrongfully convicted by a prosecutor moonlighting as an advisor to the judge who heard Erma’s criminal case. Now, the entire appeals court has agreed to rehear the case.
Such so-called “en banc” rehearings are vanishingly rare. This will be just the second time we have had one in IJ’s history.
Erma is one of hundreds of Texans whose criminal conviction was tainted by a major conflict of interest: The man prosecuting her secretly worked for the judge overseeing her case. Because she was innocent, Erma wouldn’t take a plea bargain. And because she eventually received punishment for a crime she didn’t commit, that offense on her record means she cannot pursue her dream of becoming a nurse.