By Tim Talley
Associated Press
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) -- An attorney for a death row inmate convicted of killing his girlfriend's 3-year-old daughter 10 years ago asked the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals Tuesday to set aside his death sentence, arguing that jurors in the case may have misunderstood the sentencing options.
James Lawrence Mitchell III was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to die for the July 2000 beating death of Charita Rashawn Frerene, who suffered severe head and internal injuries. But attorney James Lockard of the Oklahoma Indigent Defense System said confusion and legal missteps prevented Mitchell from instead being sentenced to life in prison without parole.
"A monkey wrench got thrown into the works," Lockard told the five-judge court during a hearing at the Oklahoma City University School of Law attended by more than 200 students and faculty members.
Lockard asked the court to modify Mitchell's sentence to life without parole or order a new sentencing hearing. The court did not indicate when it will rule.
Mitchell, 36, was originally convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death in Oklahoma County in 2003 but the appeals court overturned his conviction in 2005, ruling inadmissible evidence had been used against him.
His attorneys had claimed the mother of the children, Shawanda Nicole Rogers, was to blame for the child's death. Rogers was convicted in 2002 of first-degree murder and permitting child abuse and is serving a life prison sentence.
At his 2008 retrial, Mitchell was again convicted of first-degree murder. But before the beginning of the trial's second phase where jurors recommend punishment, prosecutors offered to drop their attempt to seek the death penalty if Mitchell would waive his right to appeal his conviction, Lockard said.
"The state of Oklahoma was willing to extend mercy," Lockard said. "They tried to save his life. He absolutely could have avoided the death penalty."
The deal broke down when Mitchell, who has consistently denied guilt, maintained his innocence when the trial judge, retired District Judge Virgil Black, read him his rights in order to implement the sentencing agreement.
Lockard said Black read from a standard rights form used when defendants want to plead guilty to a charge although Mitchell had already been found guilty by the jury and the agreement with prosecutors did not require him to admit guilt.
The defense attorney said the situation is unique in state case law and that he has been unable to find any previous case or statute that directly addresses it.
"We're on unpaved ground here," Lockard said.
During deliberations in the trial's penalty phase, jurors asked the judge whether life without parole meant Mitchell could be released in 45 years, the standard calculation of a life sentence for parole purposes, or would remain in prison until he died. Lockard said the judge responded "no" and referred them to their legal instructions.
"It is at best a confusing answer, and at worst a misleading one," Lockard said. "That 'no' could have been reasonably misunderstood by this jury."
Assistant Attorney General Robert Whittaker conceded the judge's answer was ambiguous but said Mitchell is responsible for his death penalty because of the severity of the crime and his refusal to acknowledge his role after the jury had already found him guilty.
"The reason this went off the rails is because of the defendant," Whittaker said. "He is denying guilt."
Published: Thu, Nov 4, 2010
