Frequently Asked Questions

Kevin Herrick has spent more than 37 years in prison serving life sentences for crimes arising from a 1989 sexual assault and burglary in Pinellas County, Florida. Kevin has maintained his innocence since his arrest.

Healthy skepticism is appropriate. Every year, courts receive numerous claims of wrongful conviction, and not all are supported by compelling evidence.

Kevin Herrick's case stands apart because it is not based solely on his assertion of innocence. The current post-conviction motion is the product of years of investigation conducted by experienced attorneys, independent investigators, legal scholars, and innocence advocates.

Among those who have devoted substantial time and resources to reviewing the case are:

• Allison Ferber Miller, former Chief of Staff for the      Office of the Public Defender for Florida's Sixth Judicial Circuit.
• Attorney Scott Cupp.
• Wrongful-conviction investigator Dr. Amanda Lewis,      Ph.D.
• Georgetown University's Making an Exoneree Program.
• The Florida Innocence Project.
• Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Gilbert King and the      Bone Valley investigative team.

Their work resulted in a comprehensive 390-page motion supported by investigative records, witness interviews, public records, forensic analysis, and legal research. The motion alleges newly discovered evidence and constitutional violations, including claims involving evidence disclosure, alternative suspect information, forensic evidence, and evidence preservation.

The court has not yet determined whether these allegations warrant a new trial, and this website does not ask visitors to reach conclusions before that process is complete.

Instead, we encourage readers to review the original court filings, supporting documents, and investigative materials available on this website and draw their own informed conclusions.

Our goal is transparency. By making the underlying records publicly available, we hope visitors can evaluate the evidence for themselves rather than relying solely on summaries or opinions. 

A comprehensive post-conviction investigation uncovered new evidence and information that was not presented to the jury at trial. Based on that investigation, a Fourth Successive Motion for Postconviction Relief was filed in April 2026 seeking a new trial.

Kevin has consistently maintained that he was wrongfully convicted and that important evidence supporting his innocence was never disclosed to his defense or presented to the jury.

The filing is a Fourth Successive Motion for Postconviction Relief filed in Pinellas County, Florida. It asks the court to vacate Kevin's conviction and grant him a new trial based on newly discovered evidence and alleged constitutional violations.

No.

The motion is a legal request asking the court to review newly discovered evidence and determine whether Kevin is entitled to a new trial. The court has not yet ruled.

The motion alleges violations of:

• Brady v. Maryland
• Giglio v. United States
• Napue v. Illinois

These cases involve the prosecution's constitutional obligations regarding disclosure of evidence and truthful testimony.

According to the motion, investigators identified:

• Alternative suspect evidence
• Previously undisclosed investigative records
• Additional forensic information
• Fingerprint evidence
• Evidence destruction records
• Missing police reports

The significance of this evidence will ultimately be determined by the court.

The motion discusses forensic evidence available in the case. Visitors are encouraged to review the court filings for a complete discussion of the forensic issues.

The motion alleges that significant physical evidence was destroyed while appellate proceedings remained available. The defense argues this prevented future forensic testing that may have been relevant to Kevin's claims.

The motion alleges that investigators uncovered information relating to another potential suspect that was not disclosed to the defense. Whether this evidence would have affected the outcome of the trial is an issue before the court.

The current motion is the result of years of investigation involving:

• Allison Ferber Miller
• Scott Cupp
• Dr. Amanda Lewis, Ph.D.
• Georgetown University's Making an Exoneree Program
• Other investigators, legal professionals, and advocates

Students and faculty participating in Georgetown University's Making an Exoneree Program reviewed the case as part of their work examining potential wrongful convictions.

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Gilbert King featured Kevin's case in two Bone Valley episodes titled "Kevin Is Next."

Kevin spent decades incarcerated alongside Leo Schofield. Following Leo's release, supporters adopted the phrase "Kevin Is Next" to express hope that Kevin's case would receive similar public attention and judicial review.

The Florida Innocence Project has been involved in reviewing aspects of Kevin's case over the years. Information regarding its involvement is available elsewhere on this website.

Kevin is represented by attorney Allison Ferber Miller, former Chief of Staff for the Office of the Public Defender for Florida's Sixth Judicial Circuit, and attorney Scott Cupp.  

The current legal team has devoted years to reviewing the case, conducting investigation, and preparing the motion now before the court.

The State will have an opportunity to respond to the motion.

The court will then determine whether Kevin is entitled to an evidentiary hearing or other relief.

Possibly.

The court will decide whether the newly discovered evidence and legal arguments warrant vacating the conviction and ordering a new trial.

Court filings, timelines, investigative summaries, and media materials are available throughout this website.

Yes.

Coverage has included:

• Bone Valley
• Georgetown University
• Local Florida news organizations
• Wrongful conviction advocates

Additional coverage is expected as the litigation progresses. 

You can help by:

• Reading the court filings.
• Sharing Kevin's story.
• Following case developments.
• Contacting journalists interested in criminal justice      and wrongful convictions.
• Sharing information responsibly and accurately.

Members of the media may request:

• Court filings
• Timelines
• Investigative summaries
• Background materials
• Interview requests

Please use the Contact page for media inquiries.

Kevin's case raises broader questions about evidence preservation, constitutional disclosure obligations, forensic reliability, and the ability of the justice system to correct potential wrongful convictions decades after trial.

Regardless of the ultimate outcome, these issues affect public confidence in the fairness and integrity of the criminal justice system.