------------------------------IN THE

COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND

------------------------------December Term, 2015
No. 2519
------------------------------STATE OF MARYLAND
v.
ADNAN SYED
------------------------------Appeal from the Circuit Court of Baltimore County
(The Honorable Martin P. Welch Presiding)
------------------------------BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE
THE INNOCENCE NETWORK

Julian Foemmel-Gaitero
Innocence Project of SNTHS
1400 Dickson St.
Sacramento, CA 95822
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On January 13, 1999 Hae Min Lee was last seen leaving Woodlawn High School, a
school in Baltimore, Maryland, before she went missing. Lee was supposed to pick her little
cousin up from daycare, but she never showed up and was reported missing. Adnan Syed,
Lees ex-boyfriend, was arrested and charged with Lees murder. The main evidence of the
prosecution against Syed is Jay Wilds confession to police that Syed strangled Lee in a Best

Buy parking lot off of Security Boulevard Baltimore, Maryland and that he was an accessory to
the murder by helping Syed bury the body at Leakin Park in Baltimore, Maryland. Syed plead
innocent but was found guilty in court and sentenced to life in prison without the chance of
parole. Wilds plead guilty to being an accessory to murder and was given two years of
probation.

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT

Adnan Syed should be given post-conviction relief because his lawyer, Cristina
Gutierrez, didnt bring up evidence that was vital to the case and because she ended the first
trial in a mistrial because she lied about evidence. The trial possibly would have went the other
way if she had provided the letters from Asia McClain that gave Syed an alibi against the state's
timeline of the murder. Gutierrez also made a scene during the trial about evidence the
prosecution brought, which she claimed she hadnt seen, which lead to a mistrial. These
mistakes led to Syeds life sentence.
ARGUMENT
McClain sent two letters to Syed on March 1, 1999 and March 2, 1999. In these letters
she claims that she talked to Syed after school. She writes, Im not sure if you remember
talking to me in the library on Jan. 13th, but I remembered chatting with you. Later in the letter,
McClain also writes, I will try my best to account for some of your unwitnessed, unaccountable
lost time (2:15 - 3:00; Jan. 13th)("Maps, Documents, Etc"). According to the Prosecutions
timeline of Lees murder, Lee was killed by Syed between 2:15 PM and 2:36 PM in the Best Buy
parking lot. These letters from Asia completely debunk the prosecutions timeline, yet they were
never brought up during the trial. It may be possible to believe that Gutierrez didnt hear about
these letters, but there is evidence against that. Sarah Koenig is a reporter who created Serial,
a podcast about the murder. In episode one she says, Maybe Adnan never actually showed the
letters to Cristina Gutierrez, his attorney. Sure, he said he did, but who knows? Well, I know.

Deep inside Gutierrez's notes on the case-- I have boxes and boxes of such stuff-- there's this in
her handwriting. Asia plus boyfriend saw him in library 2:15 to 3:15. Then there's another note,
dated July 13. It's more than four months after Adnan's arrest. This is written by one of
Gutierrez's law clerks, who visited Adnan in jail. Quote, Asia McClain saw him in the library at
3:00. Asia boyfriend saw him too. Library may have cameras (The Alibi). This proves that
Gutierrez did know about these letters sent by McClain and failed to bring them up in court. This
a mistake a reasonable lawyer would not make and it sabotaged Syeds trial.
During the first trial Gutierrezs actions lead to a mistrial. During the trial Urick brought up
exhibit 31, an exhibit of cell tower data, and Gutierrez claimed she had never seen it. The whole
scene is documented in the trial transcript:
MR.URICK: This is exhibit 31.
THE COURT: Thank you
MS. GUTIERREZ: May I see the exhibit, Mr. Urick?
THE COURT: Have you seen this before, Ms. Gutierrez?
MS. GUTIERREZ: No, your honor.
MR.URICK: Shes seen it, both when we entered it into evidence and on a day
when we provided discovery. I think they have a copy of the complete exhibit. I
remember making them.
The Judge later called Gutierrez and Syed to the bench and continued to argue with Gutierrez:
THE COURT: Ms. Gutierrez, if youre going to stand there and lie to the jury
about something that you agreed would come inMS. GUTIERREZ: JudgeTHE COURT: - Im not going to permit you to do that.
MS. GUTIERREZ: - the fact that I agreedTHE COURT: Im not going to permit you to do. That was a lie. You told a lie. Im
not going to permit you to do that.

MS. GUTIERREZ: Thats not a lie, Judge, and I resent the implication.
THE COURT: It is a lie because it was by agreement.
MS. GUTIERREZ: By agreement doesnt mean that I have seen it and so it is not
a lie
("Exhibit 31 Was the Cause of the Mistrial at Adnan's First Trial").
The Judge is calling Gutierrez a liar because she had to have agreed to the evidence the
prosecution brought for it to even be in the trial. This process is called discovery. During
discovery the prosecution and the defense attorney review each other's witnesses and
evidence, so that they are not surprised with evidence they never heard of. Even if Gutierrez
truly didnt see the evidence, it would be her fault because it was in discovery and she didnt see
it on her own volition. Because Gutierrez lied about not seeing the evidence the Judge motioned
a mistrial. If Gutierrez had stayed silent there is a chance that Syed would have been acquitted.
Julie Remy, a law clerk for Gutierrez at the time, went on Serial to talk about a poll conducted on
the jury after the State gave their case and said, The jury was polled and it was at the end of
the States case, and they interviewed the jurors and they gave every indication that they were
heading toward an acquittal (The Best Defense Is A Good Defense). After all, exhibit 31 was
just data from AT&T about the calls on Syeds phone, certainly not damning evidence that would
have proven Syed guilty beyond reasonable doubt. If Gutierrez hadnt made this mistake, Syed
would have most likely been acquitted.
CONCLUSION
Gutierrez had made grave mistakes during Syeds trial that costed him his freedom. Her
most major mistakes being not bringing up Syeds alibi in the McClain letters and arbitrarily
arguing about evidence and causing a mistrial. She was an old incompetent lawyer who was not
what she used to be. Because of Gutierrezs mistakes during trial, Syed should be granted postconviction relief.
SOURCES

"Exhibit 31 Was the Cause of the Mistrial at Adnan's First Trial." Web log post.
EvidenceProfBlog. Law Professor Blogs Network, 15 Oct. 2015. Web.
"Maps, Documents, Etc." Serial. Ira Glass, n.d. Web. 08 Dec. 2015.
Koenig, Sarah. 'The Alibi'. Serial. Ira Glass, 03 Oct. 2015. Print.
Koenig, Sarah. 'The Best Defense Is A Good Defense'. Serial. Ira Glass, 04 Dec. 2015. Print.