Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court has ruled that if the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office wants to overturn a conviction in state court, the state’s Attorney General’s Office must be given the opportunity to review the case and ensure an appropriate investigation was conducted.

The ruling came from the High Court through a King’s Bench petition. The case that prompted the ruling involved Lavar Brown, who was convicted in Philadelphia for murders tied to robberies and shootings in 2003 and 2005, per KWY News. He received a life sentence in the 2003 case, and had sent to death row for the 2005 case. Under DA Larry Krasner’s office, the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office reviewed the case via post-conviction proceedings and conceded error.

The court’s opinion sharply criticized the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office’s handling of conviction-review cases. In the ruling, the justices wrote that Brown’s case revealed a pattern of problems, alleging the office had “conceded relief although none was warranted,” violated its duty of candor, withheld material evidence, misstated facts, failed to conduct a reasonable investigation, and opposed a required evidentiary hearing. The court further noted that since 2018, the office had conceded relief in more than 100 cases and cited “numerous instances of untrustworthy concessions, lack of candor, misrepresentations of fact, lack of adequate investigation, and avoidance of hearings.” The ruling claimed his office is “unreliable.”

District Attorney Larry Krasner blasted the five Democratic and two Republican justices for their decision. Krasner decried the decision, saying, “Does that help democracy? No. It actually undermines the value of a vote in Philadelphia as compared to every other county.”

He continued, “Does it help with safety? We’ve already seen that there being integrity in the system and correcting the mistakes of the past builds trust, makes people more willing to go to court, to testify, and to contact the police.”