Man convicted of 2004 rape, robbery seeks new hearing
A man who was convicted of raping a woman during the 2004 robbery of a Lansing convenience store is seeking a hearing following testing of evidence in his case.
Testing of hairs collected in the case of Gregory Mark George Jr. indicated there was insufficient DNA for additional testing. But George is asking a judge to schedule a hearing to determine whether there is a substantial question of innocence in his case, according to court documents.
A judge can schedule such a hearing under a state law if the results of DNA testing are deemed to be inconclusive.
George, 42, was convicted in 2006 of rape, aggravated robbery and aggravated intimidation of a witness.
He was convicted of raping an employee while robbing a convenience store in Lansing.
He also was convicted of kidnapping in connection to the 2004 incident. But the kidnapping conviction was reversed in 2010 by the Kansas Court of Appeals, and he was resentenced, court records indicate.
George remains in prison. He currently is an inmate at the Lansing Correctional Facility, according to a Kansas Department of Correction website.
His earliest possible release date at this point is September 2052.
George previously was represented by attorneys for the Paul E. Wilson Project for Innocence and Post-Conviction Remedies, which is based out of the University of Kansas School of Law. Attorneys for this organization represented George as he sought DNA testing in his case. The attorneys withdrew after it was determined the DNA sample was insufficient for additional testing.
George later filed a motion on his own behalf to request a new hearing. Defense attorney James Colgan has now been appointed to represent George in the matter.
County Attorney Todd Thompson argues the matter should be dismissed.
Judge Gerald Kuckelman took up the case Thursday in Leavenworth County District Court. Kuckelman continued the case until Nov. 18.
"We'll see if we can get it resolved at that time," he said.
Kuckelman, who did not preside over George's trial, said it sounds as though George was convicted by evidence other than DNA. But the judge said he needs to review a transcript of the trial to determine what the evidence was in the case.