By Lindell KayJDNEWS.com
The N.C. Court of Appeals has ordered a new trial for a man sentenced to life in prison for his part in a 2007 homicide.
After a week-long August 2008 trial, an Onslow County jury found Jihad Melvin, 22, guilty of first-degree murder and accessory after the fact to murder for his role in the death of 32-year-old Almario Millander.
However, according to documents made public Tuesday, the Court of Appeals has ruled that the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury it could convict Melvin of first-degree murder or accessory after the fact to murder, but not both.
Melvin’s incarceration status has reverted to a pre-trial state and as such, he is eligible for bail. However, he was held without bond before his trial, so the likelihood he would be granted bond now is slim, court officials said.
After a week-long August 2008 trial, an Onslow County jury found Jihad Melvin, 22, guilty of first-degree murder and accessory after the fact to murder for his role in the death of 32-year-old Almario Millander.
However, according to documents made public Tuesday, the Court of Appeals has ruled that the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury it could convict Melvin of first-degree murder or accessory after the fact to murder, but not both.
Melvin’s incarceration status has reverted to a pre-trial state and as such, he is eligible for bail. However, he was held without bond before his trial, so the likelihood he would be granted bond now is slim, court officials said.
Prosecutors are deciding how to proceed, said Chief Assistant District Attorney Ernie Lee.
“I am consulting with Mike Maultsby, who tried the case, and District Attorney Dewey Hudson,” Lee said. “We will be in contact with the Attorney General’s Office and ask the Supreme Court to review the case.”
In March 2007, Melvin drove a Pontiac Bonneville while a passenger, Robert Ridges, sold cocaine. Millander complained about the quality of the drugs and threatened them with a sawed-off shotgun. Later, after Ridges obtained a handgun, Melvin drove him around the area looking for Millander. After learning where he was, Melvin drove Ridges to a house Rocky Run Road where Ridges shot and killed Millander, all according to court records.
Prosecutors offered Melvin a plea bargain, which he refused. He insisted on standing trial and was charged with an open count of murder, according to an affidavit in the court file.
In March, Ridges pleaded guilty to second-degree murder on the second day of his first-degree murder trial and was sentenced to 15 to 19 years in prison.
Melvin’s week-long murder trial included questions of witness intimidation and a bladed weapon almost making its way into the courtroom, according to Daily News reports at the time.
Onslow County Senior Resident Superior Court Judge Charles Henry, who presided over the trial, combined Melvin’s two convictions, dropping the accessory conviction, the lesser of the two. But the Appeals Court ruled that Henry’s action did not reduce the error made in improperly instructing the jury.
“We conclude that there is a reasonable possibility that a different result would have been reached at trial as to both charges, had the trial court correctly instructed the jury that it could convict the defendant only of one offense or the other, but not of both,” the Appeals Court ruled.
Lee said he was “surprised” by the ruling and that it is not based firmly enough on state law.
Melvin’s trial attorney, Jacksonville lawyer Wally Paramore told the trial court he had seen other cases where the jury was allowed to decide on two charges and then the lesser conviction was dropped.
“…as a prosecutor in 1985, I did exactly the same thing,” he said during a pre-trial hearing, which was documented in the Appeals Court decision. “I tried both. Both verdicts were allowed … to go to the jury, and the jury returned verdicts, and (the judge) arrested the verdict on one case, the accessory after. So that would — I can’t, in good faith, argue that that’s not the law in North Carolina.”
The Appeals Court states in its 17-page ruling that there is “some inconsistency in the case law with regard to the disposition of cases like the one before us.”
The Appeals Court relied on two cases to make its decision. In one, State v. Jewell, it was established that murder and accessory after the fact to murder are mutually exclusive offenses that arise out of the same action and a defendant may only be convicted of one or the other. That case did address the jury instruction issue.
The other case, Stave v. Speckman, the N.C. Supreme Court ruled that if two offenses are mutually exclusive and arise out of the same action, both offenses may be submitted to the jury, but the trial court “must instruct the jury that it may convict the defendant only of one of the offenses or the other, but not of both.”
State law defines first-degree murder as the killing of another human with malice, premeditation and deliberation. An accessory after the fact is knowingly assisting a person who has committed a felony.
“Because we cannot substitute our judgment for that of the jury, we vacate the judgment and order a new trial,” the Appeals Court ruled.
“I am consulting with Mike Maultsby, who tried the case, and District Attorney Dewey Hudson,” Lee said. “We will be in contact with the Attorney General’s Office and ask the Supreme Court to review the case.”
In March 2007, Melvin drove a Pontiac Bonneville while a passenger, Robert Ridges, sold cocaine. Millander complained about the quality of the drugs and threatened them with a sawed-off shotgun. Later, after Ridges obtained a handgun, Melvin drove him around the area looking for Millander. After learning where he was, Melvin drove Ridges to a house Rocky Run Road where Ridges shot and killed Millander, all according to court records.
Prosecutors offered Melvin a plea bargain, which he refused. He insisted on standing trial and was charged with an open count of murder, according to an affidavit in the court file.
In March, Ridges pleaded guilty to second-degree murder on the second day of his first-degree murder trial and was sentenced to 15 to 19 years in prison.
Melvin’s week-long murder trial included questions of witness intimidation and a bladed weapon almost making its way into the courtroom, according to Daily News reports at the time.
Onslow County Senior Resident Superior Court Judge Charles Henry, who presided over the trial, combined Melvin’s two convictions, dropping the accessory conviction, the lesser of the two. But the Appeals Court ruled that Henry’s action did not reduce the error made in improperly instructing the jury.
“We conclude that there is a reasonable possibility that a different result would have been reached at trial as to both charges, had the trial court correctly instructed the jury that it could convict the defendant only of one offense or the other, but not of both,” the Appeals Court ruled.
Lee said he was “surprised” by the ruling and that it is not based firmly enough on state law.
Melvin’s trial attorney, Jacksonville lawyer Wally Paramore told the trial court he had seen other cases where the jury was allowed to decide on two charges and then the lesser conviction was dropped.
“…as a prosecutor in 1985, I did exactly the same thing,” he said during a pre-trial hearing, which was documented in the Appeals Court decision. “I tried both. Both verdicts were allowed … to go to the jury, and the jury returned verdicts, and (the judge) arrested the verdict on one case, the accessory after. So that would — I can’t, in good faith, argue that that’s not the law in North Carolina.”
The Appeals Court states in its 17-page ruling that there is “some inconsistency in the case law with regard to the disposition of cases like the one before us.”
The Appeals Court relied on two cases to make its decision. In one, State v. Jewell, it was established that murder and accessory after the fact to murder are mutually exclusive offenses that arise out of the same action and a defendant may only be convicted of one or the other. That case did address the jury instruction issue.
The other case, Stave v. Speckman, the N.C. Supreme Court ruled that if two offenses are mutually exclusive and arise out of the same action, both offenses may be submitted to the jury, but the trial court “must instruct the jury that it may convict the defendant only of one of the offenses or the other, but not of both.”
State law defines first-degree murder as the killing of another human with malice, premeditation and deliberation. An accessory after the fact is knowingly assisting a person who has committed a felony.
“Because we cannot substitute our judgment for that of the jury, we vacate the judgment and order a new trial,” the Appeals Court ruled.
No comments:
Post a Comment
We appreciates all comments and fosters free speech, however, keep in mind that we have young readers who peruse our site. Having said that, please refrain from using profane language, and know that flaming will not be tolerated. Spam will not be tolerated.