I worked on more coerced cases and what their flaws were. I mostly worked on police threatening the suspect into falsely confessing. I found this great document that discussed the whole process of a case.
I was looking up even more cases to see what they had in common. Based on what I researched, many cases lack professionalism, intimidation plays a major key for minors and others, relying on a person who lacks trust, and failure to follow through with the evidence. I've created lists of different cases and their major flaw.
I looked deeper in the Arizona vs. Fulminante and found many flaws in the way they handled the situation. It is tiny little things that can be easily fixed. Because of there lack of professionalism in the case, it cost peoples lives.
Arizona v. Fulminante is a coerced confession case. They thought Oreste Fulminante murdered his stepdaughter. Anthony Sarivola was serving his term in jail and got Fulminante's "confession", which was coerced, sending him to a longer term
I worked on my thesis specifically coerced plea cases. The one I analyzed today was Ruffin v. State. Ruffin, Dixon, and Bivens were all found guilty for capital murder and rape. Dixon and Ruffin died before the exoneration day. In the original case (1984), Dwayne Patterson was raped and murdered in her own home. Ruffin had witnesses that proved he wasn't there that day. He confessed twice, both not remaining consistent. They lacked evidence and DNA evidence wasn't looked at carefully. In 2014, they revisited the case and found them not guilty because DNA evidence proved they were innocent and that another man committed this awful crime.