Five months after walking out of the Clarendon County courthouse a free man, Michael Pearson is now asking another court to examine how he says he lost more than 15 years of his life.
Pearson filed a civil lawsuit Jan. 30 in Clarendon County Court of Common Pleas, alleging law enforcement officers, prosecutors and government agencies played roles in his wrongful arrest, conviction and continued imprisonment following a 2010 home invasion and assault — charges he has denied since his arrest.
The lawsuit names Clarendon County, the Clarendon County Sheriff’s Office, the Third Circuit Solicitor’s Office, the South Carolina Attorney General’s Office, the City of Sumter, and several current or former officials as defendants. Pearson is seeking damages for what the complaint describes as “a wrongful conviction and incarceration,” alleging systemic failures contributed to his arrest and lengthy imprisonment.
FROM INVESTIGATION TO CONVICTION
Pearson was convicted in 2012 and sentenced to 60 years in prison. His convictions were vacated in August 2025, and prosecutors formally dismissed all charges the following month after citing newly discovered evidence.
The lawsuit alleges the case against Pearson was built on shaky investigative footing from the beginning.
According to the complaint, investigators initially had no suspects after the May 2010 attack on Edward Gibbons inside his home. Pearson later became a suspect after a tip from an informant and fingerprint evidence tied to a vehicle stolen during the crime.
Pearson’s attorneys argue in the lawsuit that automated fingerprint database testing did not match Pearson to fingerprints recovered from the vehicle. The complaint claims a fingerprint examiner later conducted a manual comparison after being told Pearson’s name, calling the process “contrary to accepted forensic standards” and prone to confirmation bias.
“Apart from the unreliable fingerprint identification, Defendants had no evidence linking Plaintiff to the robbery,” the lawsuit states, noting the victim could not identify Pearson and alleging authorities ignored an alibi supported by family members.
ALLEGATIONS OF IGNORED EVIDENCE
A central focus of the lawsuit is the claim that law enforcement and prosecutors later obtained evidence supporting Pearson’s innocence but failed to act on it.
The complaint alleges Pearson’s co-defendant eventually admitted involvement in the robbery and repeatedly told investigators Pearson was not involved. The lawsuit also references witness statements, photo lineups identifying other suspects and polygraph results that investigators said showed no deception when the co-defendant excluded Pearson from the crime.
The lawsuit alleges officials were aware of that information as early as 2023 but failed to alert courts or take steps that could have led to Pearson’s release.
It also claims investigators verified Pearson’s alibi in 2024 using information available at the time of his original arrest but allegedly overlooked during the investigation.
The complaint states Pearson remained imprisoned “after multiple governmental parties … were aware he was no longer guilty of the charges for which he was serving time.”
ALLEGATIONS INVOLVING PROSECUTORS
The lawsuit also includes allegations against Third Circuit Solicitor Ernest “Chip” Finney III, claiming he acknowledged Pearson’s innocence but delayed efforts that could have resulted in Pearson’s earlier release.
According to the complaint, Finney allegedly told Pearson’s attorneys that he would not cooperate in securing Pearson’s release unless Pearson agreed to waive potential civil claims and avoid returning to Clarendon County. The lawsuit characterizes those conditions as having “served no legitimate prosecutorial purpose.”
The complaint further alleges the South Carolina Attorney General’s Office opposed Pearson’s release despite being informed of evidence supporting his innocence, claiming the office “actively opposed his release based solely on procedural arguments unrelated to the merits of his innocence claim.”
CLAIMS AGAINST AGENCIES AND INVESTIGATORS
Pearson alleges the sheriff’s office and Clarendon County failed to properly train and supervise investigators and lacked policies requiring disclosure of newly discovered evidence of innocence.
The lawsuit also claims the City of Sumter is liable for negligence tied to fingerprint analysis conducted by a city police examiner.
Pearson asserts violations of his constitutional rights, including unlawful seizure, denial of due process and malicious prosecution, along with claims of false imprisonment, negligence and gross negligence.
RELEASE AND AFTERMATH
Pearson’s convictions were vacated Aug. 28, 2025, when Circuit Judge Robert E. Hood granted him a new trial and released him on a personal recognizance bond. On Sept. 8, prosecutors dismissed all charges, citing newly discovered evidence and prosecutorial discretion.
Pearson spent more than 15 years in prison before his release.
The lawsuit states Pearson suffered emotional trauma, reputational damage, physical and mental health effects and the loss of relationships and life opportunities during his incarceration.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT
Pearson is seeking compensatory and punitive damages, attorney’s fees and other relief. The case will proceed through civil court, where defendants will have the opportunity to respond to the allegations.
The lawsuit represents claims made by Pearson and his attorneys. No court has ruled on the allegations.
