Title: In re Washington

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

In re Washington (2002-330); 176 Vt. 529; 838 A.2d 87

2003 VT 98

[Filed 16-Oct-2003]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                                 2003 VT 98

                      SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2002-330

                            SEPTEMBER TERM, 2003

  In re Jerome Washington	       }	APPEALED FROM:
                                       }
                                       }	Chittenden Superior Court	
                                       }
                                       }
                                       }	DOCKET NO.  S0498-96 CnC

                                                Trial Judge: David A. Jenkins

             In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       ¶  1.  Petitioner, Jerome Washington, appeals from a superior court
  order denying his petition for post-conviction relief.  The issue on appeal
  is whether the superior court's conclusion that petitioner received
  effective assistance of counsel at his sentencing hearing is supported by
  the record.  We conclude that it is and affirm.

       ¶  2.  In 1993, petitioner was tried in state and federal court on
  charges of murder, attempted murder and aggravated assault, arising out of
  a 1992 incident in Burlington that resulted in the death of Melissa Wells,
  and the shooting of Chance Marden and Matthew Petrie.  In state court,
  petitioner was represented by attorney Ben Joseph.  As part of preparation
  for trial, counsel and his investigators interviewed petitioner's family
  members and an Arizona defense attorney who had represented petitioner on
  serious felony charges there.  As a consequence of these interviews,
  counsel referred petitioner to Dr. Henry Payson for a mental health
  evaluation.  Petitioner refused to answer any of Dr. Payson's questions,
  and cooperated only to a limited extent with Dr. Massad-a psychologist to
  whom Dr. Payson referred him.  Following these examinations, counsel
  requested a court-ordered competency exam that was conducted by Dr. John
  Ives.  Petitioner cooperated fully with Dr. Ives, and Dr. Ives found
  petitioner competent to stand trial.  
   
       ¶  3.  Throughout preparation for trial, petitioner was adamant that
  he did not shoot the victims and that they all were alive and well when he
  left the scene.  Moreover, petitioner continually refused to cooperate with
  counsel's efforts to explore the possibility of presenting an insanity
  defense at trial.  It was the state's theory of the case that petitioner
  shot the victims because Chance Marden had given the state evidence against
  petitioner's brother, Jacob Washington, who was awaiting trial on federal
  drug charges.  Counsel knew petitioner was aware of the state's theory and
  came to believe that petitioner was uncooperative in exploring an insanity
  defense because this defense would require petitioner to admit that he
  committed the shootings, an admission that might harm his brother in his
  federal case.  At petitioner's trial, counsel followed his client's
  directions and did not present any evidence to show that petitioner was
  suffering from mental illness at the time of the offenses.  As a trial
  strategy, counsel argued that petitioner was not the shooter, but the jury
  convicted petitioner of first-degree murder, attempted murder, and
  aggravated assault. 

       ¶  4.  Petitioner's sentencing hearing was held on July 26, 1993
  before Judge Brian Burgess.  At this hearing, counsel noted that petitioner
  continued to maintain his innocence, requested that the court consider the
  fact that petitioner had a very unusual personality, argued that the
  aggravating factor of multiple victims should not apply, and requested that
  petitioner receive the minimum sentence of thirty-five years to life.  The
  court found, as a mitigating factor, that petitioner had no significant
  prior criminal history, but went on to find that this and petitioner's
  unusual personality were outweighed by two aggravating factors-that the
  murder occurred during the commission of a felony and that it was a
  predatory murder.  Petitioner was subsequently sentenced to life
  imprisonment without parole for the murder conviction and two consecutive
  sentences of fifteen-to-twenty years and ten-to-fifteen years for the
  attempted murder and aggravated assault convictions.  This Court affirmed
  those convictions in State v. Washington, 164 Vt. 609,