Adnan Syed’s conviction was reversed by a Maryland court

An Appellate Court of Maryland Reinstated the Conviction of the 1999 Killing of the Ex-Groomfriend Hae Min Lee

A Maryland appellate court on Tuesday reinstated the conviction of Adnan Syed, the man who spent over two decades behind bars for the 1999 killing of his ex-girlfriend Hae Min Lee and whose murder case was featured in the landmark podcast “Serial.”

Syed served more than 20 years in prison for the killing of the teen before he was released in September. The judge decided to overturn the conviction nearly eight years after the allegations of the prosecution and legal representation in the case were raised on the show.

In a 2-1 decision, the Appellate Court of Maryland ruled the state’s law provides victims with the right to prior notice of the hearing on a motion to vacate convictions, and that right was violated in the case of the family of Hae Min Lee, Syed’s ex-girlfriend and high school classmate who died more than two decades ago.

That happened, they allege, by failing to give him adequate notice, withholding evidence from the family and not giving the brother a proper chance to be heard at the proceedings.

Steve Kelly, an attorney for the Lee family, told CNN in a statement that “Mr. Lee doesn’t want to see a wrongly convicted man imprisoned but it does no justice for the court to make such pivotal decisions without the facts.”

“We can do that, and accordingly, we vacate the circuit court’s order vacating Mr. Syed’s convictions, which results in the reinstatement of the original convictions and sentence,” the ruling said. “We need a new, legally compliant and transparent hearing on the motion to vacate where Mr. Lee can attend in person, as the court states its reasons in support of its motion to vacate.”

Attorney Erica Suter further disagreed with the nature of the appeal regarding proper notification of the hearings, and said the Lee’s family was properly notified.

There is notice of the hearing that Mr. Lee needs to attend and the court states its reasons in favor of the motion to vacate.

The lower court will have to conduct a transparent hearing where evidence will be presented in open court and the court’s decision will depend on evidence for the world to see, said Sanford in a statement.

“We agree with the dissenting judge that the appeal is moot and that Mr. Lee’s attendance over Zoom was sufficient,” Suter said in a statement provided to CNN by the Maryland Office of the Public Defender.

A Maryland appellate court ordered a new hearing for the murder victim in the case of a convicted felon Adnan Syed

“There is no basis for re-traumatizing Adnan by returning him to the status of a convicted felon. Adnan is still a free man at the moment, said the attorney.

“We remain optimistic that justice will be done,” Suter added. “We intend to seek review in Maryland’s highest court, the Supreme Court of Maryland, and will continue to fight until Adnan’s convictions are fully vacated.”

The existence of two suspects who may have been wrongly cleared as a result of the state investigation is one of the reasons the Baltimore City Circuit Judge was vacating.

The appellate court heard from the family attorney, who said the circuit court and prosecutors had failed repeatedly before the September decision to throw out Syed’s conviction.

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A Maryland court did not give the family of the murder victim in the case chronicled in the hit podcast “Serial” enough time to attend a court hearing in person that led to Adnan Syed’s release, a Maryland appellate court ruled Tuesday, and it ordered a new hearing to be held.

The court ruled that giving her brother, Young Lee, only one business day before the hearing was “insufficient time to reasonably allow Mr. Lee, who lived in California, to attend the hearing in person,” and required him to attend the hearing remotely.

The court ruled that allowing victims to attend a court proceeding in person is consistent with the constitutional requirement that victims be treated with dignity and respect.

The court ruled it is obligated to remedy the lower court’s violations, “as long we can do so without violating Mr. Syed’s right to be free from double jeopardy.”