>>>http://www.kansascity.com/2013/01/08/4000269/states-top-court-overturns-murder.html
>>>
>>>..some background
>>>http://justicedenied.org/woodworth.htm
>>
>>I am all for punishing the guilty (short of capital punishment) but these wrongful convictions drive me nuts. It says the conviction was overturned because evidence was withheld from his attorneys. Uh, they are not supposed to do that. There have been a number of cases here in Illinois where it was pretty clear the prosecution was more interested in conviction rates than justice being done. In some of the cases the accused was convicted and sentenced to death row. Many of the convictions were later overturned on DNA evidence, which was in its infancy at the time of their trial. They are being released at a steady rate. But how do you give them back the 10-20 years they spent in prison?
>
>If you ask me, I should throw those people (the ones that withheld evidence) to jail for the same amount + some percentage of time as the wrongfully convicted. And if the convicted was executed, well... we would lose said percentage...

These prosecutors have immunity from such charges (it's not a "criminal" offence" if the prosecutor does it..ha) thus very very rarely do they get in any trouble for it. They can face professional sanctions - but that is pretty rare too. One prime example is the scumbag that handled the Duke lacrosse case - that guy got disbarred and also got sentenced to jail - for ONE day - and a whopping $500 fine. Of course that was all over the news so people actually think prosecutors get in trouble for this kind of crap.
..and there is this twit http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57536392/texas-bar-sues-ex-prosecutor-for-withheld-evidence/ who cost a man 25 years of his life ..and worst that can happen to him is...well nothing other than getting disbarred. To make matters worse that twit is a judge now too!
However there ARE some good ones. Craig Watkins of Dallas is a great example. One of the things he did was to create a “Conviction Integrity Unit”...and even that has it's critics (yes, somehow idiots actually make an argument against freeing innocent people) because " it’s not the role of a prosecutor to look for bad convictions—that that’s the role of a defense attorney."....which is of course wrong - Both the criminal code of the state of Texas and the American Bar Association’s code clearly state that the job of a prosecutor is to seek justice. That means if a person is guilty, you try to convict him. If he’s not, you don’t. And if you have reason to believe someone has been wrongly convicted, you have a responsibility to fix that.
http://reason.com/archives/2008/04/07/is-this-americas-best-prosecut