Abu-Jamal’s lawyers say his original defense attorney didn’t properly cross-examine key witnesses, and that the prosecution "unconstitutionally suppressed evidence," and that another eye-witness lied under oath, and they can prove it.
The defense says a note from an eyewitness asking about money he is owed shows the witness was paid for his testimony. A source close to the investigation has said the note was in reference to travel reimbursement.
They also say the prosecution made notes about prospective jurors who were black, but stop short of saying they tried to toss black jurors from trial.
His team also says the defense attorney didn't "consult" with ballistic or forensic experts to argue against the prosecution version of events.
Abu-Jamal’s lawyers say his original atorney didn't question a key witness' motive for testifying, and they say prosecutors helped that witness get his driver's license back but never disclosed it.
They also say a prostitute who took the stand later told another woman she lied, under pressure from the cops.
His team referenced hearsay about three jurors meeting in a hotel room to discuss the case during trial.
The district attorney has said the office will not stand in the way of Abu-Jamal's appeal.
The higher court will not hear arguments in the case, but will instead file their opinion.