The purpose of this project was to evaluate possible adjudicative causes of wrongful convictions, which were strictly defined as cases where a defendant is convicted for a crime in which they are factually innocent. Most of the existing research on the causes of wrongful convictions suggests that errors occur during the investigative process. However, there is little to no research on how the court system, whose purpose is to catch and correct these mistakes prior to sentencing, fails to do just that. As such, a few possible adjudicative causes were proposed based on existing literature: errors in expert witness testimony, prosecutorial misconduct, representation by the defense, and race. Interview questions were generated based on each of these topics. Four attorneys \u2014 two prosecutors, one public defender, and one private defense attorney \u2014 were interviewed with these questions in order to qualitatively evaluate the legitimacy and the accuracy of these proposed adjudicative causes. The results indicated that attorneys rely on (and believe that jurors rely heavily on) an expert witness' performance rather than their statements and that race does not play a role in the likelihood that a defendant will be wrongfully convicted. Likewise, all four attorneys indicated that both prosecutors and defense attorneys are eager to pursue justice and that no one person is to blame for a wrongful conviction. In conclusion, errors made in the adjudicative process that lead to wrongful convictions might simply be the cause of human error.