On August 28, 1992, a black male entered the victim's apartment, claiming he was wanted for murder and needed money to get to New York. He stole money and credit cards and raped her. Immediately after the intruder left her apartment, the victim called the police and described her assailant and his clothing. She was taken to a hospital, where biological samples were taken. The following day, she was shown many slides and photographs, including one of McKinley Cromedy, but could not identify her assailant. On April 7, 1993, almost eight months later, the victim saw a man on the street whom she believed was her attacker. Within fifteen minutes, she viewed the defendant in a show-up and identified him as her attacker.

Saliva and blood samples were taken from Cromedy for analysis. No forensic evidence linking him to the crime was presented during the trial. Fingerprints did not match him, hair samples recovered from the victim were not hers or Cromedy's, and blood samples showed that Cromedy was a non-secretor. Nevertheless, the defense avoided DNA testing at trial because they felt the case was so strong that it wasn't worth the risk of testing. In August 1994, Cromedy was found guilty of aggravated sexual assault, second-degree robbery, third-degree burglary, third-degree aggravated criminal sexual contact, and third-degree terroristic threats and sentenced to sixty years with twenty-five years of parole ineligibility.

At trial, the victim provided eyewitness testimony and an accurate description of her attacker and his clothing. A detective who knew Cromedy corroborated the victim's claim that her attacker had a strange walk.

Cromedy's appeal addressed the cross-racial identification because the judge refused to instruct the jury on the permissibility of treating cross-racial identifications as less trustworthy than same-race identifications. Cromedy was then granted a new trial, but a jury of eleven white people and one black person again found him guilty.

The defense claims that they chose not to have DNA testing done at the time of trial because of ignorance, not strategy. After the guilty verdict, the defense petitioned for DNA testing, but the prosecution opposed. After the high court granted a new trial, the prosecution agreed to DNA testing. The tests were conducted by the New Jersey State Police crime laboratory and the results excluded Cromedy as a possible contributor of the DNA profile found on a vaginal swab on December 8, 1999. After over five years in prison, Cromedy was released on December 14, 1999.

New Jersey statute limits compensation for wrongfully convicted individuals to $20,000 per year of wrongful incarceration. His suit is pending.