SB 1170 revises Missouri law on compensation for wrongful convictions and creates a new civil remedy for people who were convicted and later imprisoned for crimes they did not commit. The bill repeals the existing restitution provision in section 650.058 and replaces it with a new process in section 506.400 that allows a claimant to sue the state in circuit court after a conviction is reversed or vacated and the person is acquitted on retrial or the charges are dismissed. To qualify, the claimant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that they were actually innocent, did not contribute to the conviction through perjury or fabrication, and meet filing deadlines. The bill also requires the court to issue a certificate of innocence if relief is granted.
The compensation formula would pay $179 per day of wrongful imprisonment, with additional compensation for time spent on parole, post-release supervision, or sex-offender registration, and it authorizes attorney’s fees, nonmonetary relief such as counseling or housing assistance, and tuition assistance at public colleges and universities. Awards are structured partly as an initial lump sum and partly as an annuity, unless the court finds a lump sum is in the claimant’s best interest. The bill also provides automatic expungement of the wrongful conviction record and destruction of related biological samples, and it directs the Department of Higher Education to administer tuition waivers and related reimbursements.
In addition to creating the wrongful-conviction compensation claim, SB 1170 amends the State Legal Expense Fund statute, section 105.711, to specify that judgments under the new wrongful-conviction section are payable from that fund. It also updates and reorganizes existing fund provisions covering state officers, employees, certain health care professionals, volunteer medical providers, attorneys working for nonprofit or government entities, and other specified agents. The bill preserves existing limits and procedures for many claims while carving out the new wrongful-conviction judgments as a payable category under the fund.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill materials is supportive of expanding remedies for people who were wrongfully convicted, with the measure framed as a compensation and restoration bill rather than a punitive or regulatory one. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes in the provided materials, there is no direct evidence of floor debate or formal opposition in the record supplied here. The structure of the bill suggests a policy preference for making exonerated individuals whole through both monetary compensation and reentry support.
The main points of contention likely center on the state’s financial exposure, the evidentiary burden placed on claimants, and the interaction between this new remedy and existing restitution law. The bill requires proof of actual innocence and bars recovery for people who contributed to their conviction through perjury or fabrication, which may be intended to limit claims but could also be a hurdle for some exonerees. Another possible issue is the repeal of the prior restitution statute and the shift to a new civil action model, including the use of the State Legal Expense Fund and the cap/structure of payments, which affects the state treasury, the attorney general’s office, the courts, and the Department of Corrections and Higher Education.
SB 1170 would repeal Missouri’s existing wrongful-conviction restitution statute, section 650.058, and replace it with new sections 506.400 and 506.403 that create a civil cause of action for exonerated individuals, establish compensation standards, and provide tuition assistance. It would also amend section 105.711 to make wrongful-conviction judgments payable from the State Legal Expense Fund, thereby shifting payment responsibility to a state fund and tying the new remedy to existing state claims-payment procedures. The bill affects the courts, the attorney general, the commissioner of administration, the Department of Corrections, the Department of Higher Education, and exonerees seeking compensation, expungement, and related relief.
The bill appears generally favorable toward wrongful-conviction compensation and reentry support, with its text emphasizing innocence, restoration, and practical assistance such as tuition, housing, and counseling. No committee testimony or vote history was provided, so there is no documented opposition or support from the record beyond the bill’s pro-relief design. Based on the statutory changes alone, the measure seems intended to strengthen and modernize compensation for exonerees while limiting recovery to those who can meet defined innocence and procedural requirements.
The most likely areas of contention are the fiscal impact on the State Legal Expense Fund, the requirement that claimants prove actual innocence by a preponderance of the evidence, and the exclusion of people who are found to have contributed to their convictions through perjury, fabricated evidence, or similar conduct. Another possible point of dispute is the repeal of the prior restitution framework in favor of a new civil lawsuit model, including the payment structure, deadlines, and the interaction with other civil awards or settlements. Stakeholders most affected would include exonerees, the attorney general, state fiscal administrators, and agencies responsible for administering payments, expungements, and tuition benefits.