Murderpedia

 

 

Juan Ignacio Blanco  

 

  MALE murderers

index by country

index by name   A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

  FEMALE murderers

index by country

index by name   A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

 

 

 
   

Murderpedia has thousands of hours of work behind it. To keep creating new content, we kindly appreciate any donation you can give to help the Murderpedia project stay alive. We have many
plans and enthusiasm to keep expanding and making Murderpedia a better site, but we really
need your help for this. Thank you very much in advance.

   

 

 

Arthur Martin ROSS

 
 
 
 
 

 

 

 

 
 
 
Classification: Murderer
Characteristics: Robbery
Number of victims: 1
Date of murder: April 10, 1990
Date of arrest: 4 days after
Date of birth: May 24, 1954
Victim profile: James Ruble, 26 (real estate agent)
Method of murder: Shooting (handgun)
Location: Tucson, Arizona, USA
Status: Executed by lethal injection in Arizona on April 29, 1998
 
 
 
 
 
 

On April 10, 1990, Arthur Ross telephoned the victim, a 26-year-old male real estate agent. He told the victim that he was a business man interested in leasing a vacant office at the comer of Ina and Thorneydale in Tucson.

Ross met with the victim, and once inside the business, shot the victim twice in the head with a nine millimeter handgun. Ross fled with the victim's wallet, which contained a credit card, a bank card, and identification. He than used the bank card to withdraw approximately $800 from the victim's account at automatic teller machines in Tucson and Casa Grande.

The victim's roommate and a co-worker became concerned when he did not return from the appointment. They obtained his appointment book and went to the office building, where they found the body.

Police followed a trail of credit card and bank card transactions, which led to the defendant's arrest in Casa Grande on April 14, 1990.

PROCEEDINGS

    Presiding Judge: Michael D. Alfred
    Prosecutor:  Rick Unklesbay
    Start of Trial:  December 18, 1990
    Verdict:  February 1, 1991
    Sentencing: April 19, 1991

Aggravating Circumstances

    Pecuniary gain
    Especially heinous/depraved

Mitigating Circumstances

    None sufficient to call for leniency

PUBLISHED OPINIONS

   
State v. Ross, 180 Ariz. 598, 886 P.2d 1354 (1994).

 
 

Last Meal

3 Grilled cheese & fried egg sandwiches, Macaroni & cheese (lots)
Pint of mint chocolate chip ice cream, 2 cans of Pepsi

 
 

Arthur Ross, 43, had legal options available but didn't use them, saying he was tired of living on death row and would rather die.

He had no final words.

Ross arrived in Tucson in April 1990 and began plotting his crime immediately, prosecutors say. He posed as a businessman interested in renting office space to persuade James Ruble, a 26-year-old real estate agent 4 years out of the University of Arizona, to take him to the empty office on April 10.

Once inside the building, Ross shot Ruble in the head with a handgun, dragged him behind a counter and shot him again. He fled with Ruble's wallet containing a credit card, a bank card and identification.

Ross withdrew $800 from Ruble's accounts, and used his victim's ID card to get a driver's license. Ross was arrested in Casa Grande 4 days later.

Prosecutors called him a career criminal with convictions in Kansas, Tennessee, Missouri, Kentucky and California.

At the time of the slaying, Ross was on parole for a 1989 2nd-degree burglary conviction in Georgia. He was released from prison there after serving 8 months of a 20-year sentence.

 
 

Arizona executes killer of real-estate agent

April 29, 1998

PHOENIX (CNN) -- Convicted murderer Arthur Martin Ross was put to death by lethal injection at 12:03 a.m. (3:03 a.m. EDT) in the death house at the state prison complex southeast of Phoenix. The fatal dose killed the 43-year-old three minutes later, officials said.

Witnesses reported that Ross had no last words and seemed ready to accept his fate.

State officials said Ross could have lived at least three more years had he not declined to pursue his available appeals. A state panel decided against clemency Friday.

Ross, called a career criminal by prosecutors, was sentenced to die in 1991 after killing and robbing a 26-year-old Tucson, Arizona, real estate agent.

Ross is the 11th person to be executed in Arizona since the state resumed capital punishment following a 29-year absence. He is the second person in a week to be put to death.

Last Wednesday, a Honduran national died by lethal injection after last-minute efforts by that country's president and the Vatican failed. Jose Roberto Villafuerte, 45, was executed for the 1983 slaying of his girlfriend in a move that sparked anti-American protests in Honduras.

 
 

Arthur Ross

A man convicted of killing a real estate agent after luring him to a vacant office to rob him was executed by injection. Arthur Ross, 43, had legal options available but didn't use them, saying he was tired of living on death row and would rather die. He had no final words.

Ross arrived in Tucson in April 1990 and began plotting his crime immediately, prosecutors say. He posed as a businessman interested in renting office space to persuade James Ruble, a 26-year-old real estate agent 4 years out of the University of Arizona, to take him to the empty office on April 10.

Once inside the building, Ross shot Ruble in the head with a handgun, dragged him behind a counter and shot him again. He fled with Ruble's wallet containing a credit card, a bank card and identification. Ross withdrew $800 from Ruble's accounts, and used his victim's ID card to get a driver's license.

Ross was arrested in Casa Grande 4 days later. Prosecutors called him a career criminal with convictions in Kansas, Tennessee, Missouri, Kentucky and California. At the time of the slaying, Ross was on parole for a 1989 2nd-degree burglary conviction in Georgia. He was released from prison there after serving 8 months of a 20-year sentence.

 
 

State v. Ross, 180 Ariz. 598, 886 P.2d 1354 (1994)

PROCEDURAL POSTURE:

Defendant was convicted in Superior Court (Pima) of premeditated first-degree murder and armed robbery and sentenced to death for first-degree murder. This is defendant's automatic direct appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court.

AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES:

(F)(5) (Pecuniary Gain) - UPHELD
The defendant's admitted objective was to steal money and identification. It is not relevant whether he intended to kill before the robbery. A person furthers his pecuniary gain motive when he kills to facilitate escape and to ensure keeping the stolen items. Here, the defendant killed to steal credit cards and bankcards. The defendant lured the victim real estate agent to a vacant store under the pretext of an interest in leasing the property. Once inside, the defendant demanded the victim's wallet and during the ensuing struggle, shot the victim in the head. The defendant dragged the victim's body behind the counter and again shot him in the head. After stealing the victim's wallet, the defendant immediately began using the victim's bank and credit cards. He withdrew money from a bank, obtained a temporary driver's license, and bought a car with the victim's identification. The defendant had the victim's wallet in his possession when he was arrested by the police.

(F)(6) (Heinous, Cruel or Depraved) - REVERSED

Cruel: Not addressed.

Heinous or Depraved: Reversed. Senselessness and helplessness alone "will ordinarily not be sufficient to prove heinousness or depravity." 180 Ariz. at 607.
Senselessness: Found. Defendant argued that the victim fought back during the robbery so he had to shoot him to complete the robbery. The Court disagreed. Defendant had the victim's wallet before the second shot was fired, so there was no need to shoot again. Defendant could have taken victim's wallet without killing him.
Helplessness: Found. The victim was shot twice. He was rendered helpless by the first shot and hence, the second shot was delivered when the victim was helpless. 180 Ariz. at 606.
Witness Elimination: Not found. The Court articulated three fact patterns where witness elimination may be found, pursuant to previously existing case law. First, "where the murder victim is a witness to some other crime, and is killed to prevent that person from testifying about the other crime"; second, when "a statement by the defendant that witness elimination is a motive for the murder" is made; third, "where extraordinary circumstances of the crime show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that witness elimination is a motive. This will only occur in the most extreme cases." 180 Ariz. at 606. The Court held that the facts of this case did not fit into any of the three categories.

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES:

The Court found that the following mitigating circumstances existed, but were insufficiently substantial to call for leniency:

Lack of Criminal History
Family Ties

The Court found the defendant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence the existence of the following as mitigating circumstances:

Difficult Childhood/Family History; Model Prisoner; and Cooperation with police

JUDGMENT: Convictions and death sentence affirmed. The Arizona Supreme Court reversed the (F)(6) finding and then reweighed the aggravating and mitigating circumstances before affirming the sentence.

 

 

 
 
 
 
home last updates contact