Deserving Release: Relief For A Wrongfully Convicted Man?


West Palm Beach, Fla. US~Observer Special Report — Since his conviction of DUI manslaughter on Sept. 15, 2011, Jamie Clark has adamantly maintained his innocence. Clark’s attorneys, Benjamin Waxman and Alan Ross of Robbins, Tunkey, Ross, Amsel, Robins & Waxman filed a motion for post-conviction relief (new trial) on Feb. 13.

On March 1, Florida’s 4th District Court of Appeals granted Waxman’s motion, relinquishing jurisdiction to the trial court, giving the trial court power to rule on Clark’s argument that the State of Florida committed a Brady violation by withholding exculpatory evidence (evidence that could have been used to prove his innocence) during his first trial. Waxman’s motion referred to “newly discovered evidence” not being disclosed to the defense that clearly contributed to Clark’s conviction. The motion further claimed that ineffective assistance of counsel committed by Clark’s trial defense attorney violated Clark’s 6th Amendment right to be adequately represented.

Further delay of Clark’s case occurred when the State prosecutor argued that ineffective assistance of counsel was not specifically listed in the appellate court’s ruling, which caused concern that the relinquishment of jurisdiction was isolated to only the Brady violation. This, along with clarification on whether Circuit Judge John Kastrenakes has the jurisdiction to rule on a bond for Clark, has briefly delayed Clark’s release from prison pending his anticipated new trial. On June 24, Waxman filed a new motion with the appellate court to ask that it grant the lower court permission to rule on ineffective assistance of counsel and Clark’s bond. This motion is pending.

After the appellate court rules on the matter of jurisdiction, the lower court will then rule on pending motion for bond.

Clark has been in prison for almost two years. Oct. 13 will mark seven years since the tragic accident occurred. Seven years of Clark’s life has been taken from him. Clark deserves justice. He deserves a new trial with a well-informed jury that’s been given the “newly discovered evidence” that was not disclosed during his first trial. Other key evidence that Clark’s previous attorney failed to produce during the first trial should be given to an impartial jury as well, so that justice is served in Florida’s 15th Judicial Circuit Court. In fact, Clark’s case should be dismissed in its entirety based on the conclusive evidence of his innocence.

It is reported that an evidentiary hearing is expected sometime in September.

Please support Clark’s case by “liking” the “Jamie Clark Deserves Justice” Facebook page.

The US~Observer prompts Prosecutor Dave Aronberg to seek justice in this case.

Be responsible, please contact Aronberg’s office and demand justice for Clark. He may be reached via phone at 561-355-2225 or by email at

If you have information on anyone involved in this case contact the author of this article at or call the offices of the US~Observer at 541-474-7885.

–Joseph Snook


Personal Liberty

Joe Snook

is an Investigative Reporter with the US~Observer Newspaper. A former decorated Assault Medic in the 82nd Airborne Division and Ron Paul Campaign Coordinator. Joseph assists victims of the criminal justice system to help them achieve total vindication.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

  • dan

    Fines are not enough punishment for the deliberate miscarriage of justice….
    until prosecutors and judges are imprisoned for the same amount of time as the innocents they lock-up…
    after all ,if a fine is insufficient for a criminal …..

  • Paul

    Our nation is going down-hill fast. We can’t trust government and now our court system is based on political pressures and not the truth. As with the Travon/Zimmerman case, had all information been disclosed on Travon’s background, the people would’ve had a different oppinion on the outcome of the case. As it turns out, Trevon was nothing less than a typical troubled hoodlum.

  • JThaddeustoad

    If the answer to the key elements of the case are …. yes he was driving drunk and yes he killed people, the case should be closed… We are caught up in legalism and as a result we rely on the letter of laws that were put in place by people who had an agenda and an intent to manipulate judges and juries…. If the spirit of law prevailed in this verdict than it should stand…