Justin Chapman’s settlement was the resolution of a legal malpractice lawsuit he filed in Fulton County Court against Fenn Little, the attorney who handled his initial appeal after a 2007 arson and murder conviction in Bremen, Georgia. The suit settled in June 2017 for a confidential amount, with no terms publicly disclosed.1AJC. Justin Chapman Settles Lawsuit Against His Former Lawyer
What the Malpractice Suit Alleged
Chapman sued Little for the way his first appeal was handled. According to the complaint, Little failed to conduct a meaningful investigation of the case, did not review trial transcripts or video-recorded witness interviews that contained evidence helpful to the defense, did not interview witnesses, and made incorrect statements to the court. Chapman’s filing argued that Little had essentially “skimmed” the record instead of mounting a genuine appellate challenge.1AJC. Justin Chapman Settles Lawsuit Against His Former Lawyer
The suit settled in June 2017. The dollar figure remains confidential.1AJC. Justin Chapman Settles Lawsuit Against His Former Lawyer
The Evidence a Careful Appeal Would Have Found
What made the malpractice claim consequential was what a thorough appellate investigation eventually uncovered. Attorneys at the Atlanta firm Bondurant, Mixson & Elmore took Chapman’s case pro bono after his initial appeal, and their review of the record turned up material that prosecutors had withheld from the defense at trial.2AJC. In This Murder Case, the Justice System Broke
In its 2015 decision in Danforth v. Chapman, the Georgia Supreme Court identified three specific prosecutorial failures:
- An August 2, 2006 video interview in which jailhouse informant Joseph White asked the prosecutor for help with his own pending criminal charges in exchange for information about Chapman. At trial, White had denied seeking any such arrangement.
- Suppressed statements from another inmate, William Liner, who told the prosecutor he had never heard Chapman confess and that he knew White was trying to get help with his own charges. The prosecution suppressed those statements and canceled Liner’s trial appearance.
- An incomplete document production. Prosecutors gave the defense a faxed copy of a letter White wrote to his pastor, missing its second page. The complete original surfaced through a different witness only after White had already testified and been released from his subpoena.3vLex. Danforth v. Chapman, 297 Ga. 29
Two other facts had also stayed hidden from the jury: White and a second witness, Gary Stroupe, each received $5,000 reward payments, and Stroupe’s own sister later testified she was with him on the night of the fire and that he did not see Chapman.4AJC. State Drops Charges in Case Chronicled by AJC Breakdown
How Chapman Was Cleared
In December 2013, Superior Court Judge Frederick Mullis granted Chapman a new trial through habeas corpus proceedings.2AJC. In This Murder Case, the Justice System Broke The state appealed. On April 20, 2015, the Georgia Supreme Court unanimously affirmed. Justice Robert Benham, writing for the court, held that prosecutors had committed a Brady violation by suppressing evidence favorable to the defense, noting that “the suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process… irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution.”3vLex. Danforth v. Chapman, 297 Ga. 29
Chapman was released on bond on May 11, 2015, after more than seven years in state prison.5AJC. Breakdown: The Justin Chapman Case On June 22, 2016, state prosecutors announced they would not retry him, acknowledging there was no “reasonable probability of a conviction.” White’s claims of receiving no deal had been disproven by video, Stroupe’s account had been contradicted by his sister, and the undisclosed reward payments had further undermined the state’s case.4AJC. State Drops Charges in Case Chronicled by AJC Breakdown The malpractice suit against Little was filed against that backdrop and settled about a year later.
Georgia’s New Compensation Law
The malpractice settlement was Chapman’s only publicly known recovery for years. Georgia had no standardized compensation process for exonerees; instead, they had to seek individual relief through the state legislature. That changed on May 14, 2025, when Governor Brian Kemp signed the Wrongful Conviction and Incarceration Compensation Act. The statute took effect on July 1, 2025, and provides $75,000 per year of wrongful incarceration, along with reimbursement for legal costs and fines paid as a result of the wrongful conviction. Claims are decided by administrative law judges at the Office of State Administrative Hearings and must be filed within three years of exoneration or the law’s adoption.6Georgia Innocence Project. Wrongful Conviction and Incarceration Compensation Act Is Law Any previous civil settlements or awards against the state are deducted from the compensation amount.7Office of State Administrative Hearings. Wrongful Conviction Compensation Whether Chapman has pursued or intends to pursue a claim under the new law has not been publicly reported.