Larry Holdren

The Crime

On Dec. 28, 1992, a 29-year-old woman, identified as C.M., was jogging along the Kanawha Riverfront in Charleston, West Virginia, when a man wearing a hooded jacket approached from the opposite direction and raped her. 

Afterward, C.M. ran to a nearby house and sought help. Police were called and she was taken to a hospital, where the examining physician collected her clothing as evidence, performed a rape kit, and sent the slides to the Charleston Area Medical Center. C.M. described her attacker as between 17 and 19 years old, clean-shaven, with blonde hair.

The Investigation

After an off-duty FBI agent said that 27-year-old Larry Holden resembled a man the witness saw near the scene of the attack, the police put Mr. Holden’s photograph, along with a blurred photograph of his identical twin brother, into a photographic lineup. There were five photographs in all and three of the men had beards. 

In March 1983, C.M. became agitated while looking at Mr. Holdren’s picture and selected him as her attacker. On March 10, Mr. Holdren was charged with six counts of first-degree sexual assault.

The Trial

In March 1984, prior to his trial, Mr. Holdren was notified of the existence of the laboratory slides. He was permitted to have the semen specimens tested to determine if he could be excluded as the defendant. However, due to the staining process used by the original examining physician, the specimens were rendered unsuitable for testing.

Mr. Holden went to trial in Kanawha County Circuit Court in July 1984. C.M. identified Mr. Holden as her attacker. The FBI agent testified that he saw Mr. Holden in the area of the attack that day.

Sabrina Midkiff, an analyst at the West Virginia Department of Public Safety, testified that she was unable to do a hair comparison on the two pubic hairs in the rape kit because “there was insufficient quantity of known hairs.” In response, the defense arranged for hair samples from the victim, the victim’s husband, and Mr. Holdren to be sent to Ms. Midkiff. 

After the prosecution rested its case, the defense recalled Ms. Midkiff, and she testified that one of the hairs was consistent with the victim’s hair. The second hair, she said, showed “similarities and dissimilarities” with the “microscopic characteristics” of both the victim’s and Mr. Holdren’s hair, and definitely did not match the victim’s husband’s hair. As a result, Ms. Midkiff testified that “no conclusion could be reached to the origination that hair.” 

However, during cross-examination by the prosecutor, Ms. Midkiff confirmed that she could not exclude Mr. Holdren as the source of that unknown hair.

Mr. Holdren testified that at the time of the crime, he had been at his mother’s home taking a nap. His mother, sister, and twin brother all confirmed his alibi.

On July 31, 1984, the jury convicted Mr. Holdren on all six counts of first-degree sexual assault. Judge A. Andrew MacQueen sentenced him to 30 to 60 years in prison.

In March 1986, the Virginia Supreme Court upheld his convictions and sentence.

The Exoneration

Pursuant to a state habeas court order filed on April 17, 1990, Mr. Holdren was allowed to have DNA testing performed on the two hairs in the rape kit. A more extensive test confirmed the victim as a potential source of the second hair, but more importantly, it excluded Mr. Holdren as the source.

Because this contradicted the trial testimony, Mr. Holdren petitioned for a new trial. The petition was denied in February 1994.

In 1997, the prosecution agreed to allow another examination of the remaining evidence. The evidence was sent to Forensic Science Associates, a DNA testing laboratory in Richmond, California. 

In June 1999, the laboratory reported that spermatozoa had been found, mixed with epithelial cells, on the sweatshirt. The epithelial cells, once tested, matched the victim. The spermatozoa produced a DNA profile that excluded Mr. Holdren.

On June 10, 1999, the prosecution agreed to enter a joint order with Mr. Holden’s defense team to vacate his convictions. He was released that day. 

On January 4, 2000, the prosecution dismissed the case.

Mr. Holdren subsequently was awarded $1,650,000 in compensation by the West Virginia legislature. He filed a lawsuit against the Charleston Area Medical Center, alleging it mishandled the slides. The lawsuit was settled for $1,000,000.