Keeping Law SimpleLegislation, clearly explained
Back to Wyoming
Wyoming2016Did Not Pass

SF0051

Post-conviction actual innocence

Last scannedOct 19, 2026, 2:19 AM

In one sentence

This bill would allow people convicted of felonies to ask for a new trial if they can prove they are actually innocent using evidence other than DNA, and it sets rules for paying them if they are cleared.

What it does

  • Allows a person convicted of a felony to file a motion for a new trial in the district court where they were convicted.
  • Requires the person to show they are actually innocent using newly discovered evidence that is not DNA.
  • Requires the person to prove they did not commit the crime, any related lesser offense, or any conduct involving aiding, abetting, attempting, or conspiring to commit the offense.
  • Requires the state to notify the victim if a motion for a new trial is filed.
  • Prevents a person from appealing the court's decision to grant or deny the motion.
  • Provides for compensation of $100 per day for time incarcerated, up to a total of $500,000, if the person is found actually innocent.

Who it affects

  • People who have been convicted of a felony in Wyoming.
  • District courts that handle these motions.
  • District attorneys who must respond to the motions and notify victims.
  • The Attorney General's office, which would administer compensation payments.

Limits and unknowns

  • The bill did not pass in the 2016 session, so these rules are not currently law.
  • The bill text provided is truncated, so some details about the final compensation procedures may be incomplete.
  • The bill specifically excludes DNA evidence from this new process.

Plain language

Terms to know

Actually innocent
A person did not engage in the conduct for which they were convicted, nor any related lesser offense, nor any conduct involving aiding, abetting, attempting, or conspiring to commit the offense.
Movant
The person filing the request for a new trial.
Exoneration
A legal order that clears a person of guilt, often accompanied by an order of expungement to remove the criminal record.

Official record

Sources

Source checked
Official bill pageIntroduced textOfficial digestCurrent bill text

Public statements

Why lawmakers voted

Last checked Aug 7, 12:39 AM

Voted No

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker opposes lowering the evidentiary standard to 'reasonable probability' because they believe it is too low and could result in an excessive number of new trials.

Public statementFloor statement at 1:43:18 Watch the statement
Voted No

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker opposes the amendment because they believe it weakens the bill by removing protections that limit state liability, based on their experience with similar legislation.

Public statementFloor statement at 1:44:56 Watch the statement

Larry Hicks

R · S11

Voted No

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker opposes the amendment, stating it effectively destroys the original joint committee bill by being driven solely by an advocacy group's interests.

Public statementFloor statement at 1:46:08 Watch the statement
Voted Yes

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker opposes the amendment because removing the liability waiver allows exonerees to sue the state in addition to receiving compensation, which they view as a negative outcome for the bill's structure.

Public statementFloor statement at 1:50:12 Watch the statement
Voted No

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker supports adding an appropriation to ensure there is funding available for compensation, arguing that without money behind the obligation, the bill's provisions would be meaningless.

Public statementFloor statement at 1:54:34 Watch the statement
Voted No

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker opposes the bill because they believe existing civil rights actions provide better financial recovery for innocent individuals, making this specific compensation fund unnecessary.

Public statementFloor statement at 1:57:25 Watch the statement

Jim Anderson

R · S28

Voted No

Why they voted this way

The lawmaker opposes the bill because they fear it could allow individuals who are not actually innocent to receive compensation by exploiting procedural loopholes rather than proving innocence.

Public statementFloor statement at 1:58:00 Watch the statement

If a lawmaker is not listed, we couldn't find a published reason.

Wyoming roll calls

Recorded votes

4 roll calls

S COW:Failed 6-24-0-0-02016-02-18 · Senate6 yes 24 no
Yes
6
No
24
Absent
0
Excused
0
Conflict
0

Yes 6

Bernadine CraftS12Bruce Burns Jr.S21Cale CaseR · S25Chris RothfussD · S09Floyd EsquibelS08John HastertS13

No 24

Bill LandenR · S27Brian BonerR · S02Charles ScottR · S30Curtis MeierS03Dan DockstaderR · S16David A KinskeyS22Drew A PerkinsS29Eli D BeboutS26Fred M EmerichS05Gerald E GeisS20Henry R CoeS18Jeff WasserburgerS23Jim AndersonR · S28Larry HicksR · S11Leland G ChristensenS17Michael J Mr. Von FlaternS24NICHOLAS PRESOgden DriskillR · S01Paul R BarnardS15Ray R PetersonS19Stan CooperS14Stephan PappasR · S07Tony RossS04Wayne H JohnsonS06
S02 - Appropriations:Recommend Amend and Do Pass 3-2-0-0-02016-02-18 · Senate3 yes 2 no
Yes
3
No
2
Absent
0
Excused
0
Conflict
0

Yes 3

Bruce Burns Jr.S21Drew A PerkinsS29John HastertS13

No 2

Jeff WasserburgerS23Tony RossS04
S01 - Judiciary:Recommend Amend and Do Pass 3-2-0-0-02016-02-17 · Senate3 yes 2 no
Yes
3
No
2
Absent
0
Excused
0
Conflict
0

Yes 3

David A KinskeyS22Floyd EsquibelS08Leland G ChristensenS17

No 2

Larry HicksR · S11Michael J Mr. Von FlaternS24
S Introduced and Referred to S01 - Judiciary 25-5-0-0-02016-02-10 · Senate25 yes 5 no
Yes
25
No
5
Absent
0
Excused
0
Conflict
0

Yes 25

Bernadine CraftS12Bill LandenR · S27Brian BonerR · S02Bruce Burns Jr.S21Cale CaseR · S25Charles ScottR · S30Chris RothfussD · S09Curtis MeierS03David A KinskeyS22Drew A PerkinsS29Eli D BeboutS26Floyd EsquibelS08Fred M EmerichS05Gerald E GeisS20Henry R CoeS18Jeff WasserburgerS23John HastertS13Leland G ChristensenS17Michael J Mr. Von FlaternS24Ogden DriskillR · S01Ray R PetersonS19Stan CooperS14Stephan PappasR · S07Tony RossS04Wayne H JohnsonS06

No 5

Dan DockstaderR · S16Jim AndersonR · S28Larry HicksR · S11NICHOLAS PRESPaul R BarnardS15

Official activity

Bill history

  1. S COW:Failed 6-24-0-0-0Senate
  2. Amendment AdoptedSenate
  3. Amendment failedSenate
  4. S Placed on General FileSenate
  5. S02 - Appropriations:Recommend Amend and Do Pass 3-2-0-0-0Senate
  6. S COW:Rerefer to S02 - AppropriationsSenate
  7. S Placed on General FileSenate
  8. S01 - Judiciary:Recommend Amend and Do Pass 3-2-0-0-0Senate
  9. S Introduced and Referred to S01 - Judiciary 25-5-0-0-0Senate
  10. S Received for IntroductionSenate
  11. Bill Number AssignedLSO

Changes

Amendments

2 stored

SF0051SS001

Failed Standing Committee by SJudiciary

SF0051SS002

Adopted Standing Committee by SAppropriations