Louisiana Pushes to Reinstate Death Sentence for Jimmie Duncan Despite Overturned Conviction, Bail Release and Victim’s Mother’s Support

PC: Jamal Barnes for the Innocence Project

Louisiana prosecutors are pressing the state Supreme Court to reinstate the overturned conviction and death sentence of former death row prisoner Jimmie Duncan, even as Duncan is free on bail for the first time in 27 years and the victim’s mother has publicly declared her belief in his innocence.

As ProPublica reporter Richard Webster wrote, “Months after a judge tossed out his 1998 murder conviction, Jimmie Duncan is free on bail. But prosecutors have asked the Louisiana Supreme Court to reinstate the death penalty for Duncan, even as the victim’s mother has come to support his release.”

Duncan spent nearly three decades on Louisiana’s death row before a district judge vacated his conviction in April. The ruling found that the evidence used to convict Duncan—especially key forensic testimony—was deeply flawed and pointed toward innocence. His release the day before Thanksgiving was widely viewed by observers as a rare moment of hope in a decades-long legal battle.

But prosecutors have made clear they intend to pursue a reinstatement of the conviction and the death sentence. The motion is now in the hands of the Louisiana Supreme Court. If unsuccessful, prosecutors have indicated they may seek review from the U.S. Supreme Court.

In an interview with the Vanguard, Webster said the dramatic turn in the case has not changed the state’s posture.

 “And they still want to kill him,” he said. 

He described the district judge’s ruling as one in which “the evidence all pointed to his innocence.”

Webster explained that prosecutors attempted to prevent Duncan’s release on bail and continued to depict him as a threat.

 “The prosecutors tried all sorts of things to even prevent the judge from making a decision on bail,” he said.

A central reason Duncan was convicted and sentenced to death was the forensic testimony of Dr. Steven Hayne and forensic dentist Michael West—a figure whose work has come to symbolize discredited and unreliable forensic practices across the South.

 Webster noted that Duncan is part of a group of defendants whose convictions were based on testimony from the same two experts. 

“There were nine people that were later exonerated because of mistakes or errors or intentional misdeeds done. And Jimmie Duncan, three of those people were actually on death row,” he said.

West’s role was especially critical. 

According to Webster, West and Hayne provided the testimony that transformed the original negligent homicide charge into a capital murder prosecution.

 Webster said, “The original charge was negligent homicide, and the only reason it was kicked up to first degree was because of the involvement of Stephen Hane and Michael West.” 

West used bite-mark analysis, including taking a mold of Duncan’s teeth and making marks on the child’s body during the autopsy, a technique that has since been widely challenged in courts and scientific communities.

West’s involvement also had a broader impact beyond Duncan’s case. His bite-mark testimony has been discredited in multiple wrongful convictions, and his methods were used to anchor prosecutions despite a lack of scientific reliability. In Duncan’s case, it helped create the basis for a death sentence where none existed before, turning what had been a charge associated with negligence into one alleging intentional and violent homicide.

The mother of the child, Haley Olivo, delivered one of the most powerful statements in the case during Duncan’s bail hearing. 

Webster recalled, “She took the stand and she’s like, ‘He is innocent.’ I believe he is 100% innocent and his conviction of murder was based on what these doctors did, like taking a mold of his teeth and making marks on a baby’s body during the autopsy.” 

Her testimony focused directly on West’s involvement and its role in securing Duncan’s conviction.

That testimony elicited a shocking exchange with the prosecutor. 

The most shocking moment came during that same hearing when she pressed the prosecutor about what had become of one of the experts whose testimony sent Duncan to death row. Webster recounted, 

“She was talking about Stephen Hayne and she’s like, ‘And where’s Steven Hayne now?’ And the prosecutor said, ‘The same place your baby is six feet under the ground.’”

The courtroom reacted immediately. Webster said “the whole courtroom was aghast” and deputies escorted the prosecutor out “because the anger at him was so palpable.”

Webster noted that Duncan had no criminal record prior to the child’s death. Despite that, the state continues to argue that he poses a danger.

 “And Jimmie Duncan did not have any criminal record prior to this,” Webster said.

Family members on both sides have supported Duncan’s release, and he is living with relatives. Webster said oral arguments before the Louisiana Supreme Court are expected in the first quarter of 2026. A decision reinstating the conviction could restore the death sentence. A decision affirming the lower court could leave the state to choose between retrying him, accepting time served, or dropping the case.

Asked about the possibility of intervention by Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry, Webster was blunt. “I would think that there’s zero chance,” he said, noting the governor “has been adamant in wanting to get as many people executed as possible.”

The role of Michael West looms over the case as the primary forensic architect of Duncan’s capital conviction. His methods helped transform a case prosecutors initially treated as negligence into one they pursued as first-degree murder worthy of death. That conversion, Webster emphasized, would not have occurred without West.

Dr. Michael West rose to prominence in the 1980s and 1990s as a forensic dentist frequently called by prosecutors in Mississippi and Louisiana, where he testified to a level of precision in bite-mark analysis that has since been discredited. 

Radley Balko, who extensively investigated West’s career, wrote that West “claimed that he could match bite marks to individual teeth with certainty,” despite the fact that “no scientific body has ever found that bite-mark analysis can reliably identify a specific person.” 

Balko also documented video evidence in which West appeared to make marks rather than identify them. 

As Balko reported, “West takes a mold of Brewer’s teeth and actually presses it into the skin of the victim.” He concluded: “At best, West’s techniques were unscientific. At worst, they were fraudulent.”

West’s testimony contributed to wrongful convictions in multiple cases, including those of Kennedy Brewer and Levon Brooks, who were later exonerated by DNA. 

The Innocence Project and the National Academy of Sciences subsequently repudiated bite-mark analysis, noting that West’s claims of certainty lacked scientific foundation. 

Yet in cases such as Duncan’s, West’s testimony helped escalate negligent conduct into capital murder, demonstrating the profound influence of discredited forensic methods on death penalty prosecutions across the South.

For Duncan, now 57, the consequences have been profound. Nearly half his life has been spent under a death sentence built on forensic testimony that has since unraveled. The possibility that the Louisiana Supreme Court could restore that sentence underscores the stakes.

Webster said the case continues to shock even those familiar with wrongful convictions. 

“A lot of this stuff is just sort of baffling,” he said. “I’ve been doing this work for a long time and I’m still surprised that I could be sort of shocked still.”

Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook.  Subscribe the Vanguard News letters.  To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue.  Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.

Categories:

Tags: