Post by SoulTrainOz on Jul 1, 2006 4:05:32 GMT -5
DAVID A. LIEB
Associated Press
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. - The state Supreme Court ordered a new sentencing hearing Friday for a southeast Missouri man who had been sentenced to die for murdering his ex-girlfriend's mother while she held his infant daughter.
The court said in a unanimous opinion that defense attorneys for Terrance Anderson should have sought during jury selection to strike a man who indicated a preference for imposing the death penalty - as they had done for others who made similar statements. Instead the man was picked as a juror.
In an appeal that focused on claims of ineffective aid by Anderson's attorneys, the Supreme Court upheld his convictions while ordering only a new sentencing. The court said the juror in question had not made any statements indicating a predisposition to vote for guilt.
Anderson, 30, was convicted of the July 1997 shooting deaths of Debbie Jean Rainwater, 41, and Stephen Eugene Rainwater, 42, of Poplar Bluff. Then age 21, Anderson had dated their daughter, Abbey Rainwater, then age 17, and was the father of her 7-month-old child.
Anderson arrived at the Rainwaters' house late at night, despite court protective orders the family had against him. Police said he forced his way into their home and - while his former girlfriend ran for help - shot her mother in the head while she held the baby, who survived. Police said Anderson then shot his ex-girlfriend's father outside the house before engaging police in a brief standoff and surrendering.
During jury selection for Anderson's trial, the juror in question said he would have to be convinced by defense attorneys that someone convicted of murder was not deserving of the death penalty - even though he understood prosecutors had the burden of proof, according to a transcript included in the Supreme Court's opinion.
The Supreme Court said Anderson's defense attorneys failed because of a note-taking error to ask that the juror be stricken from service. Yet no competent defense attorney would have left the man on the jury, the court said in an opinion that was not signed by any particular judge.
Rejecting arguments from the state, the court said the juror's inclusion amounted to a "structural error" that could not be overcome simply by defense attorneys putting on mitigating evidence during the sentencing hearing.
Yet the court said the error could easily have been corrected if only someone - a defense attorney, prosecutor or judge - had asked the juror whether he could have put aside his preference for the death penalty and followed the judge's sentencing instructions.
"Failure to do so denied Anderson his right to a fair and impartial jury and constituted ineffective assistance of counsel," the Supreme Court said.
Source:
www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/local/14941998.htm
Associated Press
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. - The state Supreme Court ordered a new sentencing hearing Friday for a southeast Missouri man who had been sentenced to die for murdering his ex-girlfriend's mother while she held his infant daughter.
The court said in a unanimous opinion that defense attorneys for Terrance Anderson should have sought during jury selection to strike a man who indicated a preference for imposing the death penalty - as they had done for others who made similar statements. Instead the man was picked as a juror.
In an appeal that focused on claims of ineffective aid by Anderson's attorneys, the Supreme Court upheld his convictions while ordering only a new sentencing. The court said the juror in question had not made any statements indicating a predisposition to vote for guilt.
Anderson, 30, was convicted of the July 1997 shooting deaths of Debbie Jean Rainwater, 41, and Stephen Eugene Rainwater, 42, of Poplar Bluff. Then age 21, Anderson had dated their daughter, Abbey Rainwater, then age 17, and was the father of her 7-month-old child.
Anderson arrived at the Rainwaters' house late at night, despite court protective orders the family had against him. Police said he forced his way into their home and - while his former girlfriend ran for help - shot her mother in the head while she held the baby, who survived. Police said Anderson then shot his ex-girlfriend's father outside the house before engaging police in a brief standoff and surrendering.
During jury selection for Anderson's trial, the juror in question said he would have to be convinced by defense attorneys that someone convicted of murder was not deserving of the death penalty - even though he understood prosecutors had the burden of proof, according to a transcript included in the Supreme Court's opinion.
The Supreme Court said Anderson's defense attorneys failed because of a note-taking error to ask that the juror be stricken from service. Yet no competent defense attorney would have left the man on the jury, the court said in an opinion that was not signed by any particular judge.
Rejecting arguments from the state, the court said the juror's inclusion amounted to a "structural error" that could not be overcome simply by defense attorneys putting on mitigating evidence during the sentencing hearing.
Yet the court said the error could easily have been corrected if only someone - a defense attorney, prosecutor or judge - had asked the juror whether he could have put aside his preference for the death penalty and followed the judge's sentencing instructions.
"Failure to do so denied Anderson his right to a fair and impartial jury and constituted ineffective assistance of counsel," the Supreme Court said.
Source:
www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/local/14941998.htm