For years, DNA has been clearing the wrongly convicted. But what of those who can factually prove they were wrongly convicted when genetic material isn't available?

Bell didn't have specific numbers, but based on national exoneration rates Utah would likely see one or two people a year who would qualify. The compensation is designed to keep the state from being sued in the event of an honest mistake.

Bruce Dallas Goodman was convicted for the 1984 beating death of his live-in girlfriend, according to a 2004 news release from the Utah Attorney General's Office. Her body was found near a freeway off-ramp north of Beaver. He was exonerated in 2004, after he'd spent 19 years in prison, when DNA tests on genetic material found at the crime scene excluded him.

Goodman's case is the only one in Utah listed on innocenceproject.org, an organization dedicated to exonerating the innocent through post-conviction DNA testing.

The bill's language leaves the door open to a lawsuit in the event of a true tort, such as when the North Carolina District Attorney was disbarred for his actions in the Duke Lacrosse case.

"If a person could show deliberate prosecutorial misconduct, they may be able to overcome [the bill's language], and they probably should," Bell said. "They're not obligated to show either/or."

The bill wouldn't apply to illegal immigrants, Bell said.

On Wednesday the Senate gave it a final nod and sent it to the House for that body's approval.

"There are going to be mistakes once in a while, and this tempers that a little," said Sen. Scott Jenkins, R-Plain City.

A single "nay" came from Sen. Karen Mayne, D-West Valley City, who is concerned that the bill would take away the wrongly accused's right to file a lawsuit.