Supreme Court reinstates Pedro Hernandez conviction in Etan Patz case

The Supreme Court restored Pedro Hernandez’s conviction in the Etan Patz murder case, reversing a federal appeals court that had opened the door to a new trial. The 6-3 ruling put back in place the 2017 verdict in one of the nation’s most famous missing-child cases and closed another chapter in a legal fight that had stretched for years.

Etan Patz disappeared on May 25, 1979, in SoHo in Lower Manhattan, when he was 6 years old. His case became a national touchstone, helping launch the U.S. missing-children movement and putting his face on milk-carton campaigns in the 1980s. The disappearance also helped drive President Ronald Reagan’s declaration of National Missing Children’s Day on May 25, 1983, and contributed to the creation of the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children in 1984.

Hernandez, a former local delicatessen worker and bodega clerk in Etan’s neighborhood, was named a suspect in 2012 and later confessed to the crime. His defense argued that the confession was false and tied to mental illness. Prosecutors had already been forced through two earlier proceedings: Hernandez’s first trial ended in a mistrial, and his second trial in 2017 ended with a guilty verdict after a five-month proceeding that included 66 witnesses.

The case then moved through the appeals system on a question that went to the heart of how old, emotionally charged prosecutions are reviewed. A federal district court denied Hernandez’s habeas petition, but the New York-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit reversed and ordered him released or retried. The appeals court said the trial judge’s answer to a jury question about the confession had been improper. In July 2025, that court said Hernandez was entitled to a new trial, reviving the possibility that prosecutors would have to present the case a third time.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said his office had remained steadfast in seeking justice for Etan Patz and his family. Bragg also said the Supreme Court upheld the conviction and that the basis for overturning it was “a slender reed,” arguing that the appeals ruling ignored the five-month trial and the testimony of 66 witnesses.

With the high court’s decision, the 2017 conviction is restored and the long-running legal battle appears to be over, underscoring how narrowly appellate courts can examine trial errors even in cases that have shaped public memory for decades.