|
|
| Mississippi justices reject death row inmates' new trial motion |
| By Associated Press |
| Published: 12/08/2003 |
|
Condemned murderer Charles Ray Crawford may not like how his attorney presented his defense, but there's nothing in the case that justifies a new trial, the Mississippi Supreme Court ruled last Thursday. Crawford was sentenced to death in 1994 for the murder and rape of a Northeast Mississippi Community College student. He claimed he did not remember the attack, but led authorities to the body buried in leaves in a wooded area. The state Supreme Court upheld his death sentence in 1998. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case that year. In last Thursday's post-conviction appeal, Crawford wanted a new trial because of ineffective assistance of counsel. Presiding Justice Chuck McRae, writing in the 8-0 court decision, repeated what the justices have said many times: "There is no constitutional right to errorless counsel." McRae said Crawford failed to prove that there was a "reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the outcome" of the trial would have been different. The court also dismissed Crawford's claims that a court ordered mental examination was an interrogation and in violation of his right to counsel. Crawford claimed the results of the mental examination should not have been allowed in evidence at his trial. McRae said the court record from Crawford's trial showed his attorney knew about the examination. In another case, the justices upheld the 1998 murder conviction and life sentence given Frederick E. Schuck in George County. Schuck was convicted in the shooting death of Byron Beasley, his cousin, after a day of drinking and arguing, according to the court record. In his appeal, Schuck said his confession should not have been allowed as evidence against him. Authorities testified they did not try to question Schuck when he was arrested because he was too drunk, according to court records. They did question the defendant the next day and the confessions were entered into evidence. Schuck claimed that the alcohol, cocaine, and prescription drugs in his system rendered his waiver of his rights ineffective. He said he signed the waiver but didn't know what he was doing. Justice Kay Cobb, writing for the court, said Schuck's mental condition did not make his confession inadmissible. She said there was sufficient testimony that the statement by Schuck was made freely and voluntarily after a valid waiver of his rights. Cobb said once that was shown by the state, the burden shifted to the Schuck to prove otherwise, and that he did not do. |
advertise
|
privacy policy
|
add URL
|
about us
|
terms/disclaimer
|
contact us
|
join our team
|
help
Comments:
No comments have been posted for this article.
Login to let us know what you think