Patz went missing while walking to school in SoHo in 1979.
October 14, 2025, 9:35 PM
A new trial over the man convicted of murdering Etan Patz is uncertain despite a court order.
A federal appeals court said Pedro Hernandez should be retried or released because of an error by the trial judge.
FILE- In this Nov. 15, 2012, file photo, Pedro Hernandez appears in Manhattan criminal court in New York. Hernandez, convicted of killing 6-year-old Etan Patz who disappeared in 1979, is set to learn his punishment on Tuesday, April 18, 2017, in one of America’s most notorious missing-child cases.
Louis Lanzano/AP
The Manhattan district attorney’s office is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene.
In the meantime, prosecutors asked a federal judge on Tuesday to give them 90 days to decide whether they would put Hernandez on trial again.
Defense attorneys said prosecutors should only have 30 days. The judge said she would decide how much time is warranted in the next few days.
Patz went missing while walking to school in SoHo in 1979. He became the first missing child whose face appeared on a milk carton and changed the way the country responds to missing children cases.
FILE – This May 28, 2012, file photo shows a newspaper with a photograph of Etan Patz that is part of a makeshift memorial in the SoHo neighborhood of New York. While Pedro Hernandez told police he choked 6-year-old Patz in 1979, his defense said it was fiction from a man with an IQ in the bottom 2 percent of the population and mental illness that makes it difficult for him to distinguish real life from fantasy.
Mark Lennihan/AP
Hernandez, 64, is currently in state prison serving a 25-year-to-life sentence after he was convicted in 2017 of kidnapping and murdering Patz.
Popular Reads
Because of the lack of physical evidence, the trial — Hernandez’s second, after the first jury hung — hinged entirely on Hernandez’s purported confessions to luring little Etan into a basement.
Hernandez, who has a documented history of mental illnesses and a low IQ, initially confessed after seven hours of questioning by three police officers. Immediately after Hernandez confessed, the police administered Miranda warnings, began a video recording, and had Hernandez repeat his confession on tape. He did so again, several hours later, to an assistant district attorney.
When deliberating, the jury sent the judge three different notes about Hernandez’s confessions. One of them asked the judge to explain whether, if the jury found that Hernandez’s confession before he was read his rights «was not voluntary,» it «must disregard» the later confessions. They responded, without further explanation, that «the answer is no.»
The federal appeals court concluded «the state trial court’s instruction was clearly wrong» and «that the error was manifestly prejudicial.» The court said Hernandez must be released or retried within a reasonable amount of time.
