| First Name | Ray |
| Last Name | Krone |
| Year of Conviction | 1992 |
| Year of Exoneration | 2002 |
| Testing inculpated culprit | Cold Hit |
| State of Conviction | Arizona |
| Trial, Bench Trial, or Guilty Plea | 2 Trials |
| Type of Crime | Rape and Murder |
| Death Sentence | Yes |
| Gender of Exoneree | Male |
| Race of exoneree | White |
| Juvenile | No |
| Type of Innocence Defense |
|
| Description / Quotes from Testimony Concerning Defense | ● The exoneree was the only witness testifying in support of the alibi |
| Did the defendant testify at trial? | Yes |
| Quotes from Exoneree Testimony | Missing transcript for defense case |
| Types of evidence at trial |
|
| Type of Forensic Evidence |
|
| Types of Flawed Forensics |
|
| Reason why invalid | (1), (6) Invalid individualization as to bite marks; masking |
| Brief Quote / Description of Testimony | The analyst testified: “A. My opinion is that the teeth that are represented to me as being Ray Krone’s teeth did cause the injury patterns that we call bite marks. Q. And how certain are you of your opinion? A. I’m certain. It’s a very good match.” Claims that bite mark comparison “has all the veracity, all of the strength that a fingerprint would have.” The defense also never learned that FBI expert Skip Sperber had examined the bite marks before Rawson, and concluded, “It could not have been clearer. . . Ray Krone had two higher teeth than his incisors that would have marked when he bit. Those weren’t there in the evidence.” See Part II.D. for a discussion of this case. |
| Highest level reached | Appeal |
| Claims Raised During All Appeals and Postconviction |
|
| Claims granted, resulting in preexon. reversal |
|
| Citations to judicial opinions | State v. Krone, 897 P.2d 621 (Ariz. 1995) |