Repository Collection 03

State v. Michael Parker

CASE ENTRY

Last Revised • July 11, 2026

This Source Verification Page documents the National Registry of Exonerations case profile for State v. Michael Parker, cited in Claim III of the Supplemental Motion. The case is referenced as an example of a North Carolina conviction later overturned following evidentiary failures, advances in forensic science, and expert review that undermined the prosecution's theory of the case. It is included to illustrate comparable circumstances in which subsequent scientific and investigative review supported post-conviction relief.


Related SMAR Citation

“State v. Mike Parker: Pender Co. SBI mishandled evidence, presenting chain-of-custody failures, and DA's theory contradicted by later forensic review led to vacatur”


Case Name

State v. Michael Parker


Location

Henderson County, North Carolina


Convictred

1994


Exonerated

2014


Verification Source

The National Registry of Exonerations


Source Location

The National Registry of Exonerations


Highlighted Pages

2 - 3


Referenced in the Supplemental Motion

Page 59, Paragraph: 121


Source Status

✔ Obtained and reviewed.

✔ Relevant passages highlighted.

✔ Publicly available source

✔ Included within the Source Verification Archive


Cited to Support

May's allegation that North Carolina courts have granted post-conviction relief where subsequent medical, forensic, and expert review demonstrated that the evidentiary foundation supporting a conviction was unreliable. The Michael Parker case is cited as an example in which newly developed medical evidence, advances in forensic child interviewing techniques, and expert review undermined the prosecution's forensic theory, resulting in the vacatur of Parker's conviction. May relies upon Parker to illustrate that North Carolina courts have granted relief when later scientific and investigative review revealed that the evidence supporting a conviction was fundamentally flawed.


Supporting Documents

Original Article

Link to the original article.

View Website →


Highlighted Research Copy

Working research copy containing the highlighted passages cited in the Supplemental Motion.

View PDF →


Continue Your Research

Return to Claim III

Continue browsing the sources cited throughout Claim III.

Browse Sources →

Return to Source Verification Archive

Return to the main Source Verification Archive and explore additional sections of the Supplemental Motion.

Browse Archive →