ROCHESTER, N.Y. (AP) — A New York appeals court has overturned the manslaughter conviction of Kaitlyn Conley, a woman accused of fatally poisoning her boss, chiropractor Dr. Mary Yoder. On Friday, the court determined that improperly obtained evidence from Conley’s cell phone was utilized against her during the trial. This decisive ruling opens the door for Conley to potentially clear her name after serving a 23-year sentence for the 2015 death of Yoder.
Dr. Yoder, who was 60 at the time of her death, was believed to have been poisoned with an anti-inflammatory drug known as colchicine. Conley, now 31, worked as a receptionist in Yoder's office located in Whitesboro, a village in central New York, and had a past relationship with Yoder’s son. Despite the accusations against her, Conley has consistently maintained her innocence, stating, “I did not kill Mary Yoder.” In a documentary series titled “Little Miss Innocent” aired on Hulu last fall, she expressed her disappointment with the judicial process, highlighting the betrayal she felt in the system.
The case against Conley drew significant attention, leading to the production of a documentary series that chronicled the legal battles surrounding her conviction. Her initial trial ended with a hung jury, but in a retrial in 2017, she was acquitted of murder charges yet convicted on lesser manslaughter charges. The recent ruling by the mid-level state appeals court emphasized the breach of proper legal procedure, indicating that investigators overstepped their authority when they had a cybersecurity center search Conley’s cell phone. The search revealed keywords such as “poison” and “colchicine,” as well as connections to an email account used to purchase the drug.
The five-judge panel of the state Appellate Division highlighted a critical point regarding personal privacy, asserting that a cell phone can contain as much personal information as a home. Therefore, they reiterated that indiscriminate searches of cell phones could not be justified under the law. This ruling has significant implications for the handling of digital evidence in legal proceedings, emphasizing the need for adherence to established legal frameworks when obtaining evidence from personal devices.
Following the court's decision, Conley is anticipated to be transported back to Oneida County, where prosecutors will decide whether they intend to pursue the case further. The Oneida County district attorney's office was contacted for comment but had not responded at the time of the report. The development marks a notable turning point in Conley’s long-standing fight to overturn her conviction, and her legal team expresses optimism regarding her prospects for exoneration.
The overturned conviction not only raises questions about the integrity of the evidence used in her trial but also serves as a reminder of the evolving dynamics of privacy in the digital age. As this case continues to unfold, the actions of both the judicial system and law enforcement regarding the collection and usage of digital evidence will come under scrutiny, further shaping discussions related to rights and privacy in contemporary legal practice.
