In a context in which there is growing evidence that erroneous convictions are a common phenomenon in the functioning of contemporary criminal justice systems and that the main correction mechanism in Chile (post-conviction review) would not provide adequate coverage, this paper gives account of an investigation to know diverse formulas to face the problem of the correction of erroneous convictions in the comparative field. Due to the enormity of existing institutional arrangements, work will focus on two. In the first place, it will analyze a case in which the post-conviction review regulation has undergone evolution and significant legislative changes that have distanced it from the historical model, especially when expanding its hypotheses of origin (Spain). The second group of mechanisms that will be studied will be the "Case Review Commissions", independent state bodies whose purpose is to investigate and evaluate applications from people who claim to have been wrongly convicted and whose focus will be on the Criminal Case Review Commission of England, Wales and Northern Ireland.