In the case of Nelson v. Colorado, 2016, Shannon Nelson and Louis Alonzo Madden challenged a Colorado law that required them to prove their innocence by clear and convincing evidence in order to recover fines paid following criminal convictions that were later overturned. Both had been convicted on separate charges, fined heavily (Nelson was ordered to pay $8,192 while Madden was fined $4,413), but saw their convictions reversed on appeal. When they sought refunds for the money they'd paid towards these fines from the state of Colorado under its Exoneration Act , they were denied because they could not conclusively prove their innocence. The U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Nelson and Madden with a 7-1 majority decision stating that once a conviction is reversed it must be treated as if it never occurred thus eliminating any requirement for defendants to prove their innocence before getting back what's rightfully theirs. The court held that this violated due process protections under the Fourteenth Amendment which guarantees fair treatment through normal judicial system especially as regards an individual’s fundamental rights.

In the dissenting opinion of Nelson v. Colorado, Justice Clarence Thomas argued that the majority's decision was not grounded in historical or legal precedent. He contended that once a defendant is convicted, their property (including money paid as fines or fees) becomes the state's property. Therefore, if a conviction is later overturned, there isn't an automatic right to refunds because it would mean returning what now belongs to the state. He also disagreed with applying due process principles for this case since he believed they were meant for protecting individual rights and not about resolving disputes over property interests after criminal convictions are reversed.