Ronnie Winn was wrongly convicted following the 1999 death of James Rendleman. Originally charged with murder, the jury returned a guilty verdict for involuntary manslaughter, reflecting the weakness of the state’s evidence against him. The conviction was based on inconsistent eyewitness testimony, questionable forensic conclusions, and a deeply flawed investigation that failed to account for motives for the eyewitnesses to lie and Mr. Rendleman’s chronic health issues.
Multiple eyewitnesses initially provided statements implicating someone other than Winn. Several of those accounts shifted by the time of trial. Jay Badial, the victim’s roommate, first told law enforcement that Jay King was responsible for the altercation. By trial, however, Badial identified Winn as the assailant. Other witnesses minimized Ed Nunez’s involvement in the altercation, only later including him in the narrative as someone who helped Rendleman. These reversals came despite a witness seeing Rendlman still standing and ready to fight after Winn had already exited the apartment. Indeed, while initially being treated by the paramedics, Rendleman said “Keel [or Cal] Johnson” attacked him.
Winn sustained a head injury during the incident when Rendleman struck him with a 40-ounce beer bottle. A neighbor, who heard Winn scream in distress, helped Winn leave the scene, while Rendleman’s roommates and friends remained inside—some of whom had a known pattern of violence against Rendleman. Rendleman’s injuries included a tennis-shoe pattern on his face, which did not match the dress shoes Winn was wearing that night.
Rendleman died in the hospital several weeks later. At trial, the medical examiner, Susan Hogan, concluded the case of death was definitively attributed to the altercation. However, a forensic pathologist later concluded that is not the case. The decedent had a history of chronic alcoholism, cirrhosis of the liver, prior brain injuries, and medical conditions—each of which could have contributed to or caused his death.
In addition to Dr. Hogan’s incomplete findings, the credibility of Dr. Hogan’s cause of death conclusion in at least 37 cases has come into question. Dr. Hogan no longer works for the county and has since stated she would “rather go to jail than testify” in another case. The case that sparked the investigation in Dr. Hogan’s practice, also led to the discovery that a Solano County prosecutor and investigator engaged in misconduct when they attempted to sway Hogan’s findings in order to secure a conviction.
Further undermining the reliability of the conviction was expert analysis of the eyewitness identifications. Scientific advancements in the study of memory and identification have shown the particular unreliability of cross-racial identifications—an issue present in this case. One eyewitness candidly admitted difficulty identifying Black individuals, especially in poor lighting. The only two Black people involved in this case were Winn and Jay King. The eyewitness evidence ranges from inconclusive to strongly suggestive of Winn’s innocence.
Ronnie Winn’s conviction is a stark example of how racial bias, both implicit and explicit, can distort criminal investigations and undermine the integrity of a trial. In addition to bringing the false evidence as to the cause of Mr. Rendleman’s death to the court’s attention, relief is being sought under the California Racial Justice Act based on the racial disparities evident in the investigation, identification process, and charging decisions. We hope Mr. Winn’s 25-year wrongful conviction will soon come to an end.
