Etan Patz: Supreme Court reinstates murder conviction in 1979 case of missing NYC boy

NEW YORK CITY – The U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the murder conviction of the man found guilty of killing 6-year-old Etan Patz on Monday.

What we know:

In a 6-3 decision, the justices granted an appeal from Manhattan prosecutors, undoing a lower federal court’s ruling that had previously overturned the verdict against Pedro Hernandez. The court’s three liberal justices dissented.

The decision brings a dramatic legal reversal to one of New York City’s most infamous cold cases.

Patz disappearance

The backstory:

Etan Patz vanished on May 25, 1979, while walking alone for the first time to his school bus stop in SoHo. His disappearance terrified city parents, fundamentally changed how America responds to missing children, and made Etan one of the first children to have his face printed on a milk carton. Today, the anniversary of his disappearance is recognized as National Missing Children’s Day.

Hernandez, now 64, worked at a convenience store near the bus stop at the time but didn’t become a suspect until 2012. He is currently serving a sentence of 25 years to life in prison.

During his 2012 interrogations, Hernandez confessed to the crime. However, his defense attorneys have long maintained that his confessions were false, driven by a mental illness that caused him to hallucinate.

His lawyers emphasized that his initial admission only came after police questioned him for roughly seven hours before reading him his rights and recording the interview. Hernandez later repeated the confession on tape at least twice. Monday’s ruling ensures those convictions stand.

Legal battle

Dig deeper:

Hernandez’s path through the justice system has been notoriously complex. His first trial in 2015 ended in a deadlocked jury. He was convicted at a 2017 retrial, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit later reversed his murder and kidnapping conviction. The appeals court took issue with how the trial judge answered a complicated question from jurors regarding Hernandez’s Miranda rights and his multiple confessions.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg strongly criticized the appeals court’s decision, arguing that the basis for overturning the conviction was “a slender reed” that ignored the immense weight of a five-month trial featuring 66 witnesses. Prosecutors had already been preparing to try Hernandez for a third time.

On Monday, the Supreme Court agreed with Bragg’s office. In an unsigned majority opinion, the justices ruled that federal courts should not second-guess state courts under a 1996 federal law designed to limit federal oversight of state criminal trials. The court wrote that the Second Circuit “exceeded its authority in holding that Hernandez is entitled to relief.”