Opinion ID: 1427436
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Evidence Presented at the 1994 Hearing

Text: At the 1994 evidentiary hearing, McMurtrey presented the testimony of attorney Polis, attorney Sadacca, psychologist Dr. Joseph Geffen, jail guard Jeff Rogers, newspaper reporters Ben McNitt and Deborah Wyermann, and substance abuse expert Dr. Andrew Weil, as well as jail progress notes for the trial days. The state presented testimony from prosecutor Jim Himelic, detective Leo Duffner, Dr. LaWall, and psychologist Dr. Alexander Don. 1. Bertram Polis Polis, who met with McMurtrey dozens of times prior to trial, testified that McMurtrey's behavior was very inconsistent and that he was sometimes uncommunicative. One month before trial, when Polis informed McMurtrey of the State's plea offer of twenty-one years for second degree murder, McMurtrey stated that he would plead guilty only to poaching out of season. Polis stated that he did not believe that McMurtrey thought clearly about the plea offer or considered it in a rational fashion. Polis testified that, as the trial approached, McMurtrey's mental state deteriorated from the time of trial and continued to deteriorate throughout the trial. He testified that McMurtrey's demeanor fluctuated greatly during the trial, that McMurtrey was often agitated, angry, uncommunicative, and emotionally unstable, and that he had little memory of the offense. Polis also testified that McMurtrey interfered with his representation during trial, making verbal comments and threats, writing illegible notes, whispering, and mumbling. It got to the point where I was more controlling Mr. McMurtrey than I was having him assist me. Polis saw McMurtrey receive medication during recesses throughout the trial and saw him get sick from them. Polis also met with McMurtrey after trial and sentencing when McMurtrey had been moved to a new prison. Polis testified that McMurtrey was like a different person who was mentally stable, calm, and exhibited some clarity of thought that I had never seen before in him. 2. Henri Sadacca Sadacca testified that he met with McMurtrey often prior to trial, during trial, and throughout sentencing. In Sadacca's view, McMurtrey's conduct was very inconsistent. According to him, as the trial approached, McMurtrey's behavior became more extreme, and he often appeared very agitated, volatile, or heavily sedated. Sadacca also stated that McMurtrey often made strange and inappropriate comments. Throughout the trial, Sadacca witnessed jail personnel  not medical professionals  administer medication to McMurtrey while in the courtroom. Sadacca testified that he believed that it was the medication, particularly the differing varieties and quantities, that contributed to McMurtrey's radical difference in and roller-coaster behavior and his slurred speech. Sadacca also testified that McMurtrey's state prevented him from assisting in his own defense and that he believed that McMurtrey's medications interfered with McMurtrey's ability to communicate with counsel. 3. Dr. Joseph Geffen Dr. Joseph Geffen, who examined McMurtrey in 1992, was asked to review McMurtrey's jail records from early 1981 through August 1981. Reviewing all of the data, including the reports by various experts and doctors, relevant court records, and McMurtrey's statements of former drug and alcohol abuse, Dr. Geffen found that the evidence suggested that McMurtrey was not competent at the time of trial. I think that there's a lot of supportive data that I reviewed ... that would indicate that he may not have been competent, that he probably wasn't at the time, at the time of trial. When asked specifically whether there was a reasonable question as to whether or not Mr. McMurtrey was or was not competent at the time of his trial, Dr. Geffen said, Yes, I believe that there was. Without having examined McMurtrey in 1981, Dr. Geffen acknowledged that he could not state conclusively whether McMurtrey was, in fact, competent during trial. He also stated that he would have thought there was a reasonable doubt even based on the materials available at the time of trial, without the benefit of the subsequent information. Dr. Geffen also described the difference between McMurtrey as described in 1981 and when he saw him in 1992. Dr. Geffen found the difference to be striking. I would say yes, that there was a striking difference between my impressions and the picture that I had built up prior to my seeing Mr. McMurtrey based on the  not only on the reports of all the doctors who examined him, but also including the mental health records of the jail, and some of the minute entries about his behavior, and then what I saw in 1992. The difference I think would tend to support the view of his having been quite dysfunctional and quite distant, his behavior having been quite problematic, psychologically, at the time, because when I saw him several years later, he had been free of drugs, he had not had any medication, any psychotropic medications, he had not had any street drugs; his mind was clear. Dr. Geffen went on to state that McMurtrey was ashamed  that he felt ashamed of himself that he had actually avoided dealing with his trial and that he had engaged in taking so many drugs and substances which resulted in his not being able to be aware of what was going on and his not being able to assist better. 4. Jeff Rogers Jeff Rogers was employed by the Pima County Sheriff's Department as a corrections officer from November 1979 through August 1981. Rogers readily recalled McMurtrey because they interacted every day. Rogers testified that McMurtrey's behavior was erratic and that he often moved around in what the guards characterized as a Thorazine shuffle. Rogers explained that this was not a medical diagnosis, but a colloquial term referring to McMurtrey's shuffling walk, glazed eyes, and being not very alert. As time passed, McMurtrey's stupor state became more common, and by summer (and the trial), McMurtrey was in a stupor two thirds of the time that Rogers saw him. Rogers believed that McMurtrey received medication about three times a day because Rogers often accompanied the jail nurse as she dispensed medicine to each inmate. 5. Ben McNitt Ben McNitt, a former Tucson Citizen reporter, covered parts of McMurtrey's trial for the newspaper. McNitt testified that he spoke to McMurtrey on the phone and that although he tried to probe McMurtrey for his feelings about the incident and the victims, McMurtrey seemed emotionally disengaged and unable to offer a normal emotional response on any level. McNitt had spoken to hundreds of criminal defendants during his ten years as a reporter in Arizona, but he found McMurtrey's level of detachment unusual. The only time that McNitt saw McMurtrey speak in person was at the sentencing hearing. McNitt explained his impression of McMurtrey's behavior in the courtroom as follows: I have a very clear recollection that my first impression was that he appeared glazed. His eyes appeared glazed. Almost like someone who had just, you know, you just wake up and are still sort of partly asleep. 6. Deborah Wyermann Deborah Wyermann, a reporter for the Arizona Daily Star from 1978 to 1986, covered McMurtrey's trial for the newspaper. She could not remember much of the trial but testified that the sentencing was the most bizarre of the more than 150 sentencing hearings she had seen. Wyermann stated that she had a good view of McMurtrey and that she could see and hear him very clearly. Well, Mr. McMurtrey appeared to me to be  to not exactly know where he was, and in addition, ... he was erratic in both his body movements and his speech. His eyes were unfocused and glazed, and his voice was loud. Sometimes loud, sometimes soft, and then, to my way of thinking, a lot of what he said was fairly incoherent. Wyermann also recalled the spectacle in which McMurtrey knelt and asked to speak to the Creator. 7. Dr. Andrew Weil Dr. Andrew Weil, an expert in substance abuse and addiction, reviewed McMurtrey's medical records for June 29 to July 13, 1981. Dr. Weil noted that a number of the medications prescribed to McMurtrey  Valium, Dalmane, Librium, and Ativan  are benzodiazepines within a subdivision of drugs called sedative hypnotic drugs. Dr. Weil testified that these drugs are used either as nighttime sedatives or daytime anti-anxiety medications. He noted that these drugs are highly addictive and that they commonly interfere with memory, ability to concentrate, and with intellectual function. Dr. Weil admitted that the effects varied from patient to patient but stated that it's constant enough to be a major problem. Dr. Weil testified that these drugs are problematic because they are among the most commonly prescribed medications and because of the percentage of people who get them who suffer mental problems as a result of taking them. Dr. Weil also stated that combining the drugs, in the manner prescribed to McMurtrey, is an additional danger. 8. Jail Progress Notes The jail's progress notes reflected McMurtrey's erratic behavior as trial approached. In April 1981, he experienced balance problems and fell several times in his cell and once in the courtroom, which one of his doctors suggested was caused by overmedication. In June 1981, McMurtrey complained that he could not sleep because of his anxiety about the trial, and that he was so upset that he wanted to put [his] thumb in someone's eye. The notes from July 2, 1981, the second day of trial, reflect that McMurtrey was very agitated, tearful one moment then violent the next. On July 7, 1981, a nurse noted that the trial judge wished to have the doctor in jail to review the chart in reference to [McMurtrey's] complaints of stomach pain, constipation and nervous condition. McMurtrey was administered 10-milligram Valium injections on July 10 and 11 and was again prescribed Ativan and Dalmane by July 13 as well as Valium. Finally, on July 16, McMurtrey intentionally crashed his head through the window-portion of a jail door. 9. Jim Himelic Jim Himelic prosecuted the case. He stated that he did not observe McMurtrey throughout the trial but instead looked at him every once in a while like you do any trial. Himelic stated that he could not recall seeing anything out of the ordinary during the trial on [McMurtrey's] part. He testified that he never saw a deputy give McMurtrey medication and that he did not recall seeing McMurtrey drowsy or asleep at the counsel table. When asked if he remembered McMurtrey saying anything during closing arguments, Himelic stated, I don't remember. On that one I'm not saying he didn't. I just don't remember.