During my visit this weekend, Gary was telling me about a lawyer that might try to reopen his case. There was a confession from somebody else and it was not allowed in to the original trial. Is there a possibility to get the sentence overturned? Please help, any info would be welcome!

Your lawyer would have to argue an error of law if the original Judge did not allow a confession that was presented. Some people don't realize appeals are something that must focus on an error of application of the law rather than just re trying a case because one doent like the outcome. If a lawyer feels a confession was ruled inadmisable and this was an error of law by a judge then they would apppeal this part of the trial, thus hoping it is overturned and perhaps a retrial. My take on what you put in your question anyway. Hard to address some questions without a few more details though

The trial that the confession occured during was after Gary's trial. He was sentenced first and then his cousins trial was next. The confession never made it back to Gary

Well I guess it will depend on if the "confession" can exonorate your friend entirely. If there was enough evidence to convict your friend then someone confessing after the fact may or may not help reverse his conviction. I'd say the lawyer simply needs to review the evidence presented by the prosecution and review the 2 cases. There isn't really enough information for me to take a guess on "what could happen" for example, was crime in question a crime committed by 1 person or did the prosecution indicate your friend was 1 of several guilty people. Sounds like there is something worth looking into but certainly hard to answer without the facts of the case.

He and his cousins were together when someone was shot. The cousin then confessed, but his trial was after my boyfriends. They all were tried for the same case, just seperately.

Sounds like the answer is probably in how the courts complaint reads, thus it would perhaps indicate exactly what your man was convicted of. Example of senerio: guy 1 and guy 2 drive to guy 3's home and guy 1 has a firearm that he uses in guy 3's death. After the crime is committed guy 2 assist guy 1 in concealing evidence, avoiding detection, assisting in escape (drives the car and has knoweldge a crime was being committed) both guy 1 and 2 can be convicted for the murder, usually guy 2 will have a lesser offense. This is like the driver of a armed robbery of a 7-11, both can be convicted of Armed Robbery even though the driver never got out of the car. Hope I didn't confuse you, my point is, why your man and the other where both convicted by the same court for the same crime (im assuming this from what you wrote) then the above is a possible senerio. Bottom line is, what the prosecution alledged in both trials and what the men where actually found guily of (i.e. their seperate roles in the crime). It would not be unusual to have 1 defendant confess to pulling the trigger and another person getting convicted for the same crime or lesser one due to his being there and his participation.

Ok, thanks alot. Sometimes I just have trouble understanding how some of the laws work.