onald Wayne Good was arrested in 1983 when a police officer came to believe that he resembled the composite sketch of a man wanted for a rape and burglary. The officer placed Good’s picture in a photo lineup shown to the victim and her daughter, who was present during the crime. The poor quality of Good’s photo obscured his facial scar and tattoo—two potentially important distinguishing characteristics—and both women identified him as the man who broke into their home.
Good’s first trial ended in a hung jury. At his second trial, Good was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. On appeal, his conviction was overturned based on prosecutorial misconduct. Good made an argument that the prosecutor had improperly told the jury to find him guilty because he did not show enough emotion when the victim took the stand. A third trial resulted in another conviction, and he was again sentenced to life in prison in 1987.
Donald Good spent ten years in prison based on a mistaken eyewitness identification.
The evidence presented at all three trials was minimal, including little else than the eyewitness testimony of the victim and her daughter and serological testing that could not exclude Good—nor thirty percent of the white male population—as the perpetrator of the attack. In 2003, DNA testing proved Good’s innocence.
Because of a mistaken eyewitness identification, Donald Wayne Good spent ten years in prison for a crime he did not commit.
