Of the 200 people who have been exonerated in the U.S., the vast majority of them had been convicted on the basis of eyewitness testimony. We've written here about the problems with eyewitness testimony, one of which is its application by prosecutors when there's no other evidence supporting the charge.
Charles T. "Ted" Dubbs (pictured above) was convicted in three sexual assaults based solely on eyewitness testimony. Despite the fact that Dubbs had solid alibis, despite the lack of any physical evidence, despite numerous inconsistencies in the prosecution's case, he was sentenced to 12-40 years in state prison. He served five years at SCI Huntingdon before he was released a couple weeks ago by a Lancaster County judge.
In May, Harrisburg Patriot-News reporter Pete Shellem did an investigative piece on Dubbs' conviction and on the question of reliance in this case on eyewitness identification. From that piece -- required reading for anyone who cares about this issue -- it seems that prosecutors were, for a long time, more interested in making this conviction stick than in learning the truth or admitting mistakes.