Notre Dame Exoneration Justice Clinic client’s murder conviction vacated, new trial ordered

The original article, written and published by Arienne Calingo, was shared on May 6, 2026.

On Wednesday, April 22, Judge Christopher Spataro of the Elkhart Superior Court granted Notre Dame Exoneration Justice Clinic (EJC) client Iris Seabolt’s petition for post-conviction relief (PCR), vacating her wrongful murder conviction and ordering a new trial.

Seabolt was convicted of felony murder in 2004 in connection with the August 1, 2000, killing of A.J. Williams in Elkhart, Indiana. After the State presented its case at trial, Seabolt entered a guilty plea and was later sentenced to 45 years in prison. She attempted to withdraw her plea at sentencing, maintaining her innocence, but the request was denied.

In his order, Judge Spataro found that Seabolt’s conviction was fundamentally undermined by constitutional violations, including the State’s failure to disclose critical evidence. “The State’s blatant violation of Seabolt’s rights under the Due Process Clause voids her conviction and, therefore, voids her plea,” he wrote.

The court’s decision centers on newly uncovered evidence showing that the State withheld material exculpatory and impeachment evidence, including information about misconduct by former Elkhart Police Department Detective Stephen Rezutko. According to the court’s findings, Rezutko played a significant role in the investigation and the development of witness testimony used against Seabolt.

At trial, the State’s case relied heavily on jailhouse informants, as there was no forensic evidence linking Seabolt to the crime. Evidence presented during post-conviction proceedings revealed that Rezutko fabricated or influenced witness statements, including by sharing details of the crime with informants to shape their testimony. In one instance, another investigator testified that he withdrew from the case after discovering Rezutko had shown crime scene photographs to a jailhouse informant to help generate a statement.

The court also found that the State failed to disclose a video-recorded interrogation of Seabolt’s co-defendant, which Rezutko had previously testified did not exist, as well as internal affairs records documenting Rezutko’s misconduct, including paying informants for sexual acts.

Professor Jimmy Gurulé, faculty director of the Notre Dame Exoneration Justice Clinic, stated, “Detective Stephen Rezutko has been implicated in several other wrongful conviction cases in Elkhart County. Who knows how many innocent people have been falsely convicted and deprived of their freedom because of Rezutko’s illegal conduct. The EJC will continue to fight for justice in Elkhart County and beyond.”

Judge Spataro emphasized the significance of this undisclosed evidence in evaluating Seabolt’s guilty plea:

“When Seabolt pled guilty, the State had presented its entire case against her. She had no knowledge that the State’s case against her rested on fabricated evidence and the integrity of a detective who had lied under oath, lied in internal investigations, coerced witnesses during interrogations, and paid his informants for sexual acts. She was constitutionally entitled to all of this evidence to attack the integrity of the State’s case and prove her innocence, but it was withheld from her. Seabolt’s decision to accept a plea was not in any sense ‘knowing’ because the State withheld from her evidence that would have directly impacted her decision. The Constitution does not permit such a miscarriage of justice.”

The Notre Dame Exoneration Justice Clinic filed Seabolt’s petition for post-conviction relief in June 2021. The petition alleged that newly discovered evidence—including recantations from key witnesses—demonstrated her innocence and exposed systemic misconduct in the investigation and prosecution of her case.

Seabolt was released on parole in May 2022 after serving nearly 19 years in prison. Despite her release, her conviction remained in place until this ruling.

The court’s decision vacates Seabolt’s conviction and grants her a new trial. However, she has not yet been fully exonerated. The State retains the option to appeal the ruling or retry the case.

The decision marks a significant development in a case that has spanned more than two decades and raises broader concerns about the use of jailhouse informants, disclosure obligations, and the integrity of criminal investigations.

Learn more about the Notre Dame Exoneration Justice Clinic at exoneration.nd.edu.

Read the original article ›

The EJC is just one way Notre Dame Law School educates A Different Kind of Lawyer. It is one way Our Lady’s University fulfills its mission. Order of St. Thomas More members help make the EJC’s transformative work possible, empowering Notre Dame students to serve the community and help bring about a more just world.