Two judges on the court rejected state District Judge DaSean Jones’ findings that caused him to recommend last year that Ronald Hamilton receive consideration of a new punishment, saying they were “not supported by the record or law.”
Hamilton and his attorneys failed to show that the prosecutors misled the court or misrepresented any information to the jury during the punishment phase of the trial, judges Kevin Yeary and David Newell wrote in their opinion. Using false evidence to procure a conviction would violate due process.
Attorneys representing Hamilton could not be reached for comment.
The claim centered around fingerprints left more than 15 years ago on the half-empty bottle, which was found sitting outside a Houston convenience store. Defense attorneys said those fingerprints likely belonged to a killer who was not Hamilton, partly because court records show that Houston police tested the fingerprints before trial and found they didn’t match the defendant.
The defense team has said they only found out after they requested testing in 2017.
The bottle didn’t exonerate Hamilton from the murder that sent him to death row — he had already admitted guilt. The fingerprints were instead meant to help prove that he didn’t commit a second murder, which was used as part of evidence showing Hamilton was so dangerous he should be put to death.
The appeals judges found that Hamilton and his lawyers did not meet the level of proof needed to show the fingerprint evidence was false. At Hamilton’s trial, Houston police testified that the bottle didn’t tie back to him or his co-defendant, the judges said.
The defense also didn’t prove that the bottle was material in identifying the shooter in the second murder, and the witness who testified that the shooter handled a bottle before the slaying used ambiguous language and wavered on the assertion, Yeary and Newell said.
Jones had adopted the defense’s claims as fact, and the case was brought to the appeals court as the next step in the appeal. The court outright reject Jones’ findings in its opinion.
Hamilton was sentenced to death for the November 2001 slaying of Ismail Matalkah, a clerk shot during a botched robbery at a convenience store on Yellowstone Boulevard. Hamilton pleaded guilty on the first day of his trial, and his attorneys sought to convince the jury to spare his life.
During the punishment phase of the trial, prosecutors presented evidence that he was a future danger if left alive, based on his past drug history, misbehavior in jail and his alleged role in the capital murder of a second store clerk that same year.
One witness in the second murder testified that she’d seen the shooter urinate over a liquor bottle before walking inside to rob the store.
Prosecutors had said that Hamilton could still be guilty of the second killing, even if the fingerprints on the bottle didn’t belong to him. Joshua Reiss, chief of the Harris County District Attorney’s Office writs division, declined to comment.
After the appeals court’s ruling, Hamilton’s attorneys could now appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Source: houstonchronicle.com, Samantha Ketterer, November 11, 2020
🚩 | Report an error, an omission, a typo; suggest a story or a new angle to an existing story; submit a piece, a comment; recommend a resource; contact the webmaster, contact us: deathpenaltynews@gmail.com.
 |  |
Opposed to Capital Punishment? Help us keep this blog up and running! DONATE!
"One is absolutely sickened, not by the crimes that the wicked have committed,
but by the punishments that the good have inflicted." -- Oscar Wilde
but by the punishments that the good have inflicted." -- Oscar Wilde