Prince George's County restructures unit reviewing long prison sentences
A unit that helped free about 100 people in Prince George’s County was reshuffled, leaving prisoners like Davison unsure whether their cases will still be reviewed.

A quiet restructuring inside the Prince George’s County State’s Attorney’s Office has put the future of its Conviction & Sentencing Integrity Unit in doubt, raising new questions about who will get a second look at lengthy prison sentences and who will not. The unit, which the office says was the first of its kind in Maryland and remains the only one in the state, reviews cases where new evidence calls a conviction into question or where changed circumstances may make a sentence no longer appropriate.
The stakes are immediate for people already asking for release. Former unit chief Brianna Ford said judges had decided about 100 incarcerated people should not remain in prison after the unit reviewed their cases. Ford also said none of those people have committed a new crime since their release. In one case, a judge ordered Davison freed in October, a reminder that the unit’s work has not been abstract policy but a direct path out of prison for specific defendants.

The shakeup comes under Tara H. Jackson, who was appointed Prince George’s County State’s Attorney in June 2025. County circuit court judges selected Jackson to fill the vacancy for the rest of the term, and she is expected to serve in the job for 18 months. Jackson now oversees an office that says it has nearly 200 employees, including the small unit that handles some of the county’s most sensitive post-conviction and sentencing reviews.
That structure matters in Prince George’s County because the Conviction & Sentencing Integrity Unit sits at the intersection of criminal justice reform and public safety. Its mandate is narrow but consequential: to revisit cases where doubts remain about a conviction or where a sentence may no longer fit the facts on the ground. Any change in staffing, priorities or review standards could alter how many cases move forward and how quickly people learn whether their bids for relief will be heard. For those still waiting, the issue is not bureaucratic housekeeping. It is whether the county will keep offering a meaningful second look at long sentences or quietly narrow that door.
Know something we missed? Have a correction or additional information?
Submit a Tip