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.
Frances Elaine
NEWTON
At the time, the Newtons were having marital problems. Although they
lived together, they were both dating other people.
On April 7, 1987, police were dispatched to their apartment complex on a
report of a possible shooting. The deputy found the bodies Newton's
husband and two children, each shot to death with a .25 caliber handgun.
Newton and her cousin were at the location when the deputy arrived.
Earlier in the evening, Newton took a blue bag out of her car and put it
in an abandoned house which belonged to her parents. A homicide
detective later recovered the bag, which containing a .25 automatic
pistol. A ballistics expert established that the pistol was the murder
weapon.
Gunpowder residue was found on Newton's skirt. Newton, the primary
beneficiary on the insurance policies, made claims on the policies
following the killings. Newton maintained her innocence throughout,
blaming the killings on an unknown drug dealer who was owed money by her
husband.
Citations:
Newton v. Dretke, 371 Fed.Appx. 250 (5th Cir. 2004) (Habeas). Newton v. State, Not Reported in S.W.2d, 1992 WL 175742 (Tex.Cr.App.
1992).
Final Meal:
Declined.
Final Words:
None.
ClarkProsecutor.org
Media Advisory
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
Frances
Newton Scheduled For Execution
AUSTIN – Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott offers
the following information about Frances Elaine Newton, who is scheduled
to be executed after 6 p.m. Wednesday, December 1, 2004: Newton was
sentenced to death in 1988 for murdering her 21-month-old daughter,
Farrah Elaine Newton, at the same time she also killed her husband,
Adrian Newton, and her 7-year-old son, Alton Newton.
FACTS OF THE CRIME
On the evening of April 7, 1987, a Harris County
sheriff’s deputy was dispatched to an apartment complex at 6126 West
Mount Houston in response to a report of a possible shooting.
The deputy
found the bodies of the three victims inside the apartment. All three
had been shot to death. Newton and her cousin were at the location when
the deputy arrived.
Earlier in the evening, Newton took a blue bag out of
her car and put it in an abandoned house which belonged to her parents.
A homicide detective later recovered the bag, which containing a .25
automatic pistol. A ballistics expert established that the pistol was
the murder weapon.
A forensics expert for the State established that
nitrites were present on the skirt Newton wore on the day of the
shootings. In the expert’s opinion, the nitrites came from gunpowder
residue and were consistent with someone shooting a pistol in the lower
front area of the skirt.
Less than a month prior to the murders, Newton
purchased a $50,000 life insurance policy on herself, another on her
husband and a third on her daughter. Newton, the primary beneficiary on
the latter two policies, made claims on the policies following the
killings.
Psychologist Charles Covert testified at Newton’s
trial that based on a hypothetical scenario paralleling the facts in
Newton’s case, there is a probability such a person would commit violent
acts constituting a threat to society.
CRIMINAL HISTORY
Newton was convicted of forgery in December 1985 and
placed on three years probation.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
04/07/87 - Newton commits the capital offense of
murdering more than one person during the same criminal transaction.
07/17/87 - The grand jury indicts Newton for capital murder.
10/24/88 - Newton is convicted of capital murder.
10/25/88 - A Harris County jury answers the special issues in a manner
which results in Newton being sentenced to death
06/17/92 - The Texas Court of Criminal Appals affirms Newton’s
conviction and sentence.
06/28/93 - The U.S. Supreme Court denies certiorari review.
08/26/93 - The U.S. Supreme Court denies rehearing.
04/26/96 - Newton files a state writ of habeas corpus application.
12/06/00 - The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals adopts the trial court’s
findings and conclusions, and denies the writ.
12/06/01 - Newton petitions a Houston federal district court for a writ
of habeas corpus relief.
08/29/03 - The federal district court denies the writ, denies a
certificate of appealability (“COA”), and issues final judgment.
11/04/03 - Newton applies to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for a
COA.
05/20/04 - The Fifth Circuit Court denies Newton’s request.
07/07/04 - The Harris County trial court set Newton’s execution for
December 1, 2004.
08/16/04 - Newton petitions the U.S. Supreme Court for certiorari review
of the 5th Circuit’s denial of COA.
11/01/04 - The U.S. Supreme Court denies certiorari review.
11/10/04 - Newton petitions for clemency with the Texas Board of Pardons
and Paroles**
11/18/04 - Newton asked the trial court for a stay of execution and
appointment of counsel or, for a successive habeas application in the
trial court.
*Newton’s petition for clemency and her motion/successive state writ are
still pending.
Frances Elaine Newton (April 12, 1965 –
September 14, 2005) was executed by lethal injection in the state of
Texas for the April 7, 1987 murder of her husband, Adrian, 23, her
son, Alton, 7, and daughter, Farrah, 21 months.
All three victims were shot with a .25 caliber
pistol which belonged to a man that Newton had at the
time been seeing. Newton claimed that an illegal drug trade/drug dealer
killed the three.
The Houston police presented evidence that Newton's
husband was a drug dealer and was in debt to his supplier. Newton
maintained her innocence from her first interrogation in 1987 until her
execution in 2005. However, three weeks before the slayings, Newton had
purchased life insurance policies on her husband, her daughter, and
herself. These were each worth $50,000. She named herself as beneficiary
on her husband's and daughter's policies. Newton claimed she forged her
husband's signature to prevent him from discovering that money had been
set aside to pay the premiums. Newton was also found to have placed a
paper bag containing the murder weapon in a relative's home shortly
after the murders. Prosecutors cited these facts as the basis for her
motive.
Two hours before her first scheduled execution on
December 1, 2004, Texas Governor Rick Perry granted a 120-day reprieve
to allow more time to test forensic evidence in the case. There were
also conflicting reports as to whether a second gun was recovered from
the scene; ballistics reports appeared to demonstrate that a gun
recovered by law enforcement and allegedly connected to Newton after the
offense was the murder weapon. A relative of Newton who was incarcerated
shortly after the murders claimed a person he shared a cell with boasted
of killing the family. Numerous individuals, including three members of
the convicting jury, expressed concern over evidence that was not
presented during the trial.
On August 24, 2005, the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals turned down a motion for a stay of execution. It turned down
another appeal on September 9 for writ of habeas corpus. It was her
fourth application.
The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles voted 7-0 on
September 12 not to recommend that her sentence be commuted to life
imprisonment, despite evidence raising doubt about her guilt and a
letter from her husband's parents asking that her life be spared. The
same day the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
refused an appeal of her sentence. Her new attorney, David Dow, also
asked Governor Perry for a 30-day stay to prove that Newton was wrongly
linked to the murder weapon. The Supreme Court of the United States
declined without dissent two appeals on September 13.
Execution
The execution was carried out as scheduled on
September 14, 2005 by lethal injection. Newton struggled and thrashed,
knocking out one of the nurses. Frances Newton was the third woman
executed in Texas since the resumption of capital punishment in the
state in 1982. The first and second were Karla Faye Tucker and Betty Lou
Beets, respectively.
Like Beets before her, Newton made no final statement
and did not have a last meal request. Over 30 protesters from the Texas
Death Penalty Abolition Movement, the National Black United Front, and
the New Black Panther Party had gathered outside the prison. In
addition, about 75 people protested the execution outside the governor's
mansion in Austin. According to the results of a Public Information Act
request submitted by Texas Moratorium Network to the office of Governor
Rick Perry, 12,201 people contacted the governor asking him to stop
Newton's execution and 10 people contacted him in support of her
execution.
During the investigation of Frances Newton, the
forensic crime lab in the Houston Police Department was also
experiencing intense criticism for the handling of evidence. Michael R.
Bromwich, a former U.S. Justice Department official, said the Houston
Police Department and city officials "failed to provide the crime lab
with adequate resources to meet growing demands" for at least 15 years
before the exposure of problems in its DNA division.
Wikipedia.org
Newton executed for 1987 slayings
Associated Press - Sept. 14, 2005
HUNTSVILLE — Frances Newton was executed today for
the fatal shootings of her husband and two children 18 years ago,
becoming the third woman, and first black woman, to be put to death in
the state since executions resumed in 1982.
Strapped to the death chamber gurney and with her
parents among the people watching, she declined to make a final
statement, quietly saying "no" and shaking her head when the warden
asked if she would like to speak.
Newton, 40, briefly turned her head to
make eye contact with her family as the drugs began flowing. She
appeared to attempt to mouth something to her relatives, but the drugs
took effect. She coughed once and gasped as her eyes closed and her
mouth remained slightly open. Eight minutes later at 6:17 p.m. CDT, she
was pronounced dead.
One of her sisters stood flat against a wall at the
rear of the death house, her arms raised against the wall and her head
buried in her arms, refusing to watch. Her parents held hands and her
mother brushed away a tear before they walked to the back of the chamber
to console their other daughter.
About 50 demonstrators chanted outside but the crowd
paled in comparison to the group of hundreds that assembled in 1998 to
protest the execution of Karla Faye Tucker, who was the first woman
executed in Texas since the Civil War. "She's back with her family, in
her mind," said John LaGrappe, one of her attorneys, who met with Newton
less than two hours before she was executed and described her as "strong
and optimistic." "It's her faith in God," LaGrappe said. He
characterized her as the victim of a set of statutes that denied her
access to the Supreme Court and blamed state-appointed lawyers early in
her appeals process for missing deadlines that barred Newton from
raising legal claims. "It's a sad statement about the judicial process,"
he said. "To me, this is outrageous."
Two cousins of Newton's slain husband, who also
watched the execution, complained that too much attention had been
focused on Newton, and not enough on the three murder victims. "I wanted
her to apologize, just to confess," Tamika Craft-Demming said. "I don't
know if you can get any satisfaction.
"Justice is not to me served. If we saw some kind of
apology, that would have been justice." Craft-Demming, who sobbed loudly
in the death chamber, described Newton as a "mean and kind of evil-spirited
person. I knew she was vindictive. None of these things have been talked
about. "I did have a rough go in that room," she said of her experience
in the death chamber, where she broke down in tears. "I'd like to say
not one tear was for Frances. They were for the kids."
Without dissent, the high court declined a pair of
appeals about an hour before Newton was scheduled to be taken to the
Texas death chamber. The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, which last
year paved the way for Gov. Rick Perry to issue a reprieve about two
hours before Newton was set to die, on Monday unanimously rejected a
request that her death sentence be commuted to life in prison.
Perry
rejected another delay in the execution Wednesday afternoon. She also
lost appeals in state and lower federal courts. Her execution was the
13th this year in Texas. She was the 11th woman executed in the United
States since the Supreme Court in 1976 allowed the death penalty to
resume.
Newton didn't deny putting a gun in her 7-year-old
son's knapsack and stashing the bag at an abandoned house. But she and
her lawyers argued the .25-caliber blue steel revolver she hid was not
the one used to fatally shoot her son, Alton; her 21-month-old daughter,
Farrah; and her husband, Adrian, 23, at their Houston apartment.
Newton insisted she was innocent, and the claim about the gun was among several
in her appeal to the Supreme Court. She also contended her trial
attorneys were incompetent and evidence at her trial improperly was
destroyed. "I know I did not murder my kids and my family," she told The
Associated Press in a death row interview. "It's frustrating ...
nobody's had to answer for that."
Prosecutors called Newton's appeals meritless, noting
that a second gun never was recovered, that repeated ballistics tests
confirmed the gun she hid was the murder weapon, and that any
destruction of evidence was not improper. "The unbroken chain of custody
directly links Newton to the murder weapon," the Texas Attorney
General's Office said in its filing to the Supreme Court.
Newton, accompanied by a cousin, found the bodies
April 7, 1987. Her husband had been shot in the head, the two children
in the chest, all with a .25-caliber pistol.
Three weeks before the slayings, Newton took out
$50,000 life insurance policies on herself, her husband and her daughter.
She named herself as beneficiary and said she signed her husband's name
to prevent him from discovering she had set aside money to pay for the
premiums. Prosecutors said the insurance payoff was the motive for the
slayings.
The reprieve last year was granted to allow for
additional ballistics testing on the weapon. In March, the new
ballistics tests confirmed earlier findings and Harris County officials
then rescheduled her execution. Newton believed the real killer is or
may be related to a drug dealer she knew only as "Charlie," who she said
was upset with her husband for not repaying a $500 debt.
By Mark Babineck -
Sep 14, 2005
HOUSTON, Sept 14 (Reuters) - A woman convicted of
killing her family became the first black female on Wednesday to be
executed in Texas since before the U.S. Civil War after last-minute
legal and political pleas to save her failed.
Frances Newton, 40, died
by lethal injection for the April 1987 shooting deaths of her husband
and two children. Prosecutors said the motive was $100,000 in life
insurance but Newton blamed the killings on an unknown drug dealer.
The main evidence against Newton was repeated
ballistics testing of a pistol she hid under a house that showed the gun
was used to kill her family. Gunpowder residue was also found on her
skirt. Newton's lawyers disputed the gunpowder tests, saying the residue
also could have come from common garden fertilizer.
They also claimed
police found another weapon in the abandoned house, clouding whether the
one she hid was the murder weapon. Prosecutors say there was only one
gun.
The lawyers also blamed her former court-appointed
attorney, saying he conducted no investigation, had little contact with
her and had not subpoenaed any witnesses for the defense by the time her
trial began.
Newton was the 13th person executed in Texas this
year. She declined to make a final statement or a last meal request. The
state has nine more executions scheduled so far for 2005, including six
in November.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican, granted Newton a
rare reprieve two hours before her last execution date in December so
more investigation could be conducted, but the evidence was determined
to be sound and the courts declined to intervene. The U.S. Supreme Court
denied two late appeals on Wednesday, clearing the way for the lethal
injection.
The National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People, Amnesty International and several local black leaders
appealed for the Houston woman to be spared. The execution drew a larger-than-usual
gathering of protesters outside the death house in Huntsville, Texas.
Newton is the fifth woman known to have been executed
in Texas. A black slave named Lucy is thought to have been the first in
1858. Two female murderers, both white, have been put to death since
Texas resumed executions in 1982 after a brief national ban on capital
punishment imposed by the U.S. Supreme Court.
"For a long time I believed in the death penalty. But
now I know that the system can't be trusted to be right. I've been
wrongly accused, wrongly convicted," Newton told the Houston Chronicle
in an interview.
A September 14, 2005 execution date has been set for
Frances Newton, 40, who was sentenced to die for the 1987 shooting
deaths of her husband, son and daughter. Prosecutors say she killed her
family in order to collect $100,000 in insurance. Newton claims a drug
dealer was the killer. Her defense attorney says he wants tests run on
bloody carpet from the crime scene that may exonerate Newton.
Texas governor Rick Perry granted Newton a 120-day
reprieve just a few hours before she was to have been executed on Dec.
1, 2004, in order to give her attorneys additional time to investigate
questions about the evidence used to convict her, but their efforts
failed to clear her.
From the Texas Attorney General's web site: On the
evening of April 7, 1987, a Harris County sheriff’s deputy was
dispatched to an apartment complex at 6126 West Mount Houston in
response to a report of a possible shooting.
The deputy found the bodies
of the three victims inside the apartment. All three had been shot to
death. Newton and her cousin were at the location when the deputy
arrived. A friend of Newton's testified that earlier in the evening,
Newton had taken a blue bag out of her car and put it in an abandoned
house which belonged to her parents. A homicide detective later
recovered the bag, which containing a .25 automatic pistol. A ballistics
expert established that the pistol was the murder weapon.
A forensics
expert for the State established that nitrites were present on the skirt
Newton wore on the day of the shootings. In the expert’s opinion, the
nitrites came from gunpowder residue and were consistent with someone
shooting a pistol in the lower front area of the skirt.
Less than a
month prior to the murders, Newton purchased a $50,000 life insurance
policy on herself, another on her husband and a third on her daughter.
Newton, the primary beneficiary on the latter two policies, made claims
on the policies following the killings.
Psychologist Charles Covert
testified at Newton’s trial that based on a hypothetical scenario
paralleling the facts in Newton’s case, there is a probability such a
person would commit violent acts constituting a threat to society.
From December 2004: Virginia Louis does not want to
see her daughter-in-law executed on Wednesday night, but she said there
is no question in her mind that Frances Newton murdered her family in
1987. "I know she's guilty; there is no doubt in my mind," said Louis, a
61-year-old retired North Forest school bus driver and mother of the man
Newton was convicted of killing.
Newton, 39, is scheduled for a lethal injection
Wednesday for the April 1987 murders of her husband, Adrian Newton, and
her two children, 7-year-old Alton and Farrah Elaine, 21 months. Frances
Newton has repeatedly denied killing her family, saying a drug dealer
named "Charlie" may have been responsible.
She said her husband owed the
man money. State and federal courts have dismissed Newton's claims, and
for the family of Adrian Newton, the latest round of denials has been
frustrating and painful. "My son didn't use drugs. Why does she keep
saying this Charlie? Who is Charlie? There ain't no Charlie. She's
Charlie," Louis said in an interview Monday.
The Texas Criminal Court of Appeals on Monday
rejected Newton's 11th-hour appeal, and a similar effort remains pending
before the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Her petition for a 120-day
reprieve is also pending before the state Board of Pardons and Paroles.
Prosecutors said Newton killed her family to claim $100,000 in life
insurance money. Evidence at the 1988 trial showed Newton forged her
husband's signature on life insurance policies bought several months
before the deaths.
Prosecutors said the murder weapon was a .25-caliber
automatic pistol that was found in a blue bag in an abandoned house near
her apartment. A witness saw Newton hide the bag in the house. Newton
said she had found the unfamiliar gun at home and removed it as a safety
precaution.
Key evidence at Newton's trial included ballistics evidence
linking the gun to the murder. Newton's attorneys have raised questions
about the reliability of testing by the Houston Police Department crime
lab, which have come under scrutiny in recent years for providing
inaccurate evidence at criminal trials.
Newton has lodged numerous complaints about Ron Mock,
her court-appointed defense attorney. Catherine Coulter, the attorney
appointed to work with Mock, signed an affidavit last week agreeing with
Newton's attorneys that she and Mock provided ineffective legal
assistance. Prosecutors say state and federal appeals courts have
thoroughly reviewed all of Newton's claims and have no doubt of Newton's
guilt.
Several of Adrian Newton's cousins may attend the
execution, but his immediate family will not. "We're all opposed to the
death penalty," Tom Louis of Houston, Adrian Newton's brother, said. "In
my opinion, if someone commits a crime, they should have to live with
their mistakes."
Txexecutions.org
Frances Elaine Newton, 40, was executed by lethal
injection on 14 September 2005 in Huntsville, Texas for killing her
husband and children for insurance money.
On 18 March 1987, Newton, then 21, took out $50,000
life insurance policies on her 23-year-old husband, Adrian, and her 21-month
old daughter, Farrah. A policy already existed for her 7-year-old son,
Alton. At the time, the Newtons were having marital problems. Although
they lived together, they were both dating other people. Adrian's
brother, Sterling Newton, was also living in their apartment.
On 7 April 1987, between 5:30 and 6:00 p.m., Sterling
Newton came home. Frances asked him to leave for a while, to give her
some time to talk with Adrian alone about their marital problems.
Sterling left about an hour to an hour and a half later. At about 6:45
p.m., Ramona Bell - Adrian's girlfriend - phoned Adrian. Bell and Adrian
spoke for about fifteen minutes. Adrian told Bell that he was tired and
was going to go to sleep, but not until Frances left, because he did not
trust her.
Alphonse Harrison, a friend of Adrian's, had seen him
earlier in the day, and the two made plans to get together that night.
Harrison phoned the apartment between 7:00 and 7:15 p.m.. Frances
answered the telephone. When he asked to speak with Adrian, Frances put
Harrison on hold and left him there.
Between 7:00 and 7:30 p.m., Frances Newton arrived in
an automobile at the residence of her cousin, Sondra Nelms. Newton asked
Nelms to come over to her apartment for a visit. Before they left, Nelms
watched Newton remove a blue bag from her car and put it inside the
house next door to Nelms'. The house was abandonded and belonged to
Newton's parents. They then went to Newton's apartment. Upon their
arrival, they found Newton's husband and two children dead. Newton
immediately called 911.
At 8:27 p.m., Harris County sherrif's deputy R. W.
Ricks was dispatched to the apartment complex. Newton and Nelms were
present when Ricks arrived. In Newton's apartment, Ricks found the
bodies of Adrian, Alton, and Farrah Newton. Adrian was on a couch, shot
in the head. The two children were in their beds, each shot in the chest.
Deputy Ricks found no signs of forced entry or struggle.
Later that evening, Nelms told a homicide detective
about the blue bag and took him to the abandoned house. Inside the house,
he found a blue bag containing a .25-caliber semiautomatic pistol. The
gun was traced to one Michael Mouton, who told police that he had loaned
it five or six months earlier to his cousin, Jeffrey Frelow. When
detectives showed Frelow the gun, he recognized it and said that he kept
in a chest of drawers in his bedroom. He also said that his girlfriend,
Francis Newton, often did his laundry and had easy access to the gun.
On 21 April, Newton filed claims on the life
insurance policies she had taken out a month earlier. She was arrested
and charged with capital murder the next day.
A ballistics expert testified that the pistol found
in the abandoned house was the murder weapon. He also testified that
nitrate residue from gunpowder was found on the skirt that Newton was
seen wearing on the day of the shootings. He testified that another
possible source of nitrates was fertilizer. The state also presented
testimony from Sterling Newton, Ramona Bell, Alphonse Harrison, Sondra
Nelms, and Jeffrey Frelow.
Newton pleaded not guilty. At her trial, she
testified that she found the gun in her home and took it out of the
apartment as a safety measure. She said her family may have been killed
by a drug dealer named Charlie, in the process of trying to collect a
debt from her husband, a longtime drug addict. Newton had a prior felony
conviction for forgery. She received a sentence of 3 years' probation in
December 1985. A previous employer also testified that Newton was fired
from her job for stealing money.
In October 1988, a jury convicted Newton of capital
murder, for killing more than one person in the same offense, and
sentenced her to death. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the
conviction and sentence in June 1992. All of her subsequent appeals in
state and federal court were denied.
Newton maintained her innocence in a death-row
interview. "I was so scared and confused. Not only was my family dead,
but then they're charging me with murder," she said. She and her appeals
lawyers claimed that she received ineffective assistance from her
court-appointed trial lawyer, Ron Mock. In a recent interview, Mock
admitted that he was "burned out" at the time of Newton's trial and was
not enthusiastic about her case. He said that the case was an uphill
battle from the beginning. "I had nothing, really, to work with other
than Frances' saying that she did not do it." Mock has been barred from
accepting court-appointed capital murder cases since 2001.
Newton also said that the nitrate residue on her
skirt was from fertilizer. In December 2004, on a previously scheduled
execution date, Governor Rick Perry accepted the Texas Board of Pardons
and Paroles' recommendation to grant Newton a 120-day stay of execution
so that the skirt and the .25-caliber pistol could be tested again. The
skirt, however, had been contaminated after the original test. Retesting
on the pistol confirmed that it was the murder weapon.
In their most recent appeals, Newton's attorneys
claimed that investigators actually seized two or more guns as evidence
and that one of them - not the one in the blue bag hidden by Newton -
was the murder weapon. A week before her execution, the Texas Court of
Criminal Appeals rejected the multiple-gun theory as previously weighed
and rejected. The U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the U.S.
Supreme Court declined to take the case. The Texas Board of Pardons and
Paroles declined to grant a reprieve.
"I know I did not murder my kids and my family,"
Newton told a reporter in an interview. "It's frustrating ... nobody's
had to answer for that." At her execution, when the warden asked if she
had a final statement, Newton answered, "No" and shook her head. The
lethal injection was then administered. She was pronounced dead at 6:17
p.m.
Do not execute Frances Newton! - TEXAS - September
14, 2005
The state of Texas is scheduled to execute Frances
Newton on Sept. 14th for the April 1987 murders of her husband, Adrian
Newton and children Alton and Farah Newton in Harris County. If executed,
Newton would be the first African-American woman Texas has put to death
since the state resumed executions in 1982.
Newton's case embodies core problems with the death
penalty in the United States in general and in Texas in particular. Her
trial counsel was egregiously incompetent, she has a strong innocence
claim and her conviction rested in large part on the results of
ballistics testing conducted by the now-discredited Houston Police
Department's crime lab.
Furthermore, Newton has been denied effective
representation at nearly every stage of her appeal and consequently, her
case has never been thoroughly or independently investigated. In fact,
on the very day her trial began, her attorney, Ron Mock, admitted that
he could not provide the name of a single witness with whom he had
spoken. Mock is well known in Texas death penalty circles; he has had
more clients sent to death row than any other lawyer. Many of his former
clients have been executed and he is no longer assigned death penalty
cases because of his astonishingly abysmal record as an attorney.
Newton, who was 21 at the time of the crime, took out
a life insurance policy on her husband, herself, and her daughter less
than a month before the crimes were committed. This action led many to
believe she killed the victims in order to collect life insurance
benefits. Newton also was reportedly having marital problems with her
husband which the state further concluded to be evidence against her.
However, as Newton's current attorneys have pointed out, there is a
complex and overwhelming array of facts and circumstances that call into
question the integrity and accuracy of her conviction.
First, Newton was convicted of killing her seven-year
old son Alton Newton although he was not covered by a life insurance
policy. The state was not able to provide a viable motive for his death.
She also allegedly killed her 20-month old daughter for an additional
$50,000 in insurance benefits. While a problematic marital situation may
serve as motive for Newton's husband's murder, the killing of her two
children is still speculative and largely unexplained by the state.
Second, the Houston Police Department's crime lab,
which conducted ballistics testing on the weapon the state believes was
used in the murder, is now widely regarded as extraordinarily
unreliable. Without the crime lab's ballistics report, it is extremely
doubtful that Newton's case would even have gone to trial, much less
resulted in a capital murder conviction and death sentence.
Third, the state presented conflicting evidence
regarding the timing of the murders and the likelihood Newton was home
at the time they took place. Based on what the state presented, it is
highly possible that another individual could have been at the residence
at the time of the shooting. The state's evidence does not exclude this
possibility in any way.
Fourth, the state has not investigated the
possibility that another suspect or suspects may have been involved in
the murders. Police were in possession of information that Adrian Newton
was known to be a drug dealer and was in debt to a supplier. Despite
this information, apparently police never investigated the possibility
that the deaths were drug-related.
Fifth, the only other physical evidence in the case
was the presence of nitrates found on the lower part of the dress Newton
was wearing. However, while the state argued that the presence of
nitrates indicated gun powder residue, other possible sources include
fertilizer and cosmetics. It has been established that Newton's toddler
was exposed to fertilizer earlier that day. Furthermore, Newton's hands
were tested for gunpowder residue the evening of the murders; none was
found, despite the fact that gunpowder residue cannot be washed away or
quickly removed from skin after a gun has been fired.
Newton was given a prior death sentence in December
of 2004, however, Newton's clemency team took the unusual step of not
asking the Board of Pardons and Paroles to recommend clemency in
Newton's case, but rather recommended to Gov. Perry a 120-day reprieve
so that more investigation can be conducted. They claimed that the
evidence in her case was lacking and that her prior representation was
shoddy. Gov. Perry agreed to the 120-day reprieve on the day of her Dec.
1 execution date. However, little has changed regarding the facts of the
case and the state has set yet another execution date.
Please write Gov. Perry and the Board of Pardons and
Paroles and ask them to spare the life of Frances Newton.
By Allan Turner -
Sept. 14, 2005
Local black leaders warned Tuesday of divine and
political repercussions if condemned killer Frances Newton is executed
tonight in Huntsville. The warnings came during an emotional morning
news conference at the Mickey Leland Federal Building downtown, during
which U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee called on authorities to grant Newton
a new trial. Jackson Lee, D-Houston, said she would also ask the
nation's solicitor general to intervene in the case.
"The American nation values life," she said, "and
Frances Newton deserves to have her life spared. ... It's not a handout
that Newton should have her day in court again." Jackson Lee likened the
last-minute effort to save Newton to Texans who "through affection and
love stood last at the Alamo" and declared that, "we're standing for the
life of Texas."
Newton, 40, is to be executed at 6 p.m. for the 1987
murders of her husband, Adrian, 23, and the couple's 7-year-old son and
21-month-old daughter to gain insurance benefits. She would be the third
woman executed in Texas since executions were resumed in 1982 and the
13th killer executed this year. She also would be the first black woman
put to death in Texas during that time.
Newton's chances to escape death by injection have
narrowed to a last-minute appeal before the U.S. Supreme Court and an
appeal to Gov. Rick Perry to grant a 30-day stay of execution. Last
December, Perry granted Newton an execution-day stay that provided four
months to retest evidence crucial to her case. In the past week,
petitions filed with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, 5th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals and the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles have
been rejected.
Texas Innocence Network attorneys David Dow and Jared
Tyler, both University of Houston law professors, have centered their
efforts to save Newton's life on claims that multiple pistols were
seized as evidence the night of the killings. Those weapons, they
contend, could have been switched during ballistics testing, thereby
wrongly indicating that the gun Newton hid in a vacant house after the
shootings was the murder weapon. Newton has said she removed the pistol
from her apartment and hid it to keep her husband from getting into a
violent encounter with drug dealers. Much of the evidence and testimony
supporting their multiple-pistol theory, defense attorneys say, was
developed after Newton's initial trial.
Assistant District Attorney Roe Wilson denies that
more than one weapon was recovered. Tests on three occasions have
identified the weapon Newton hid as the murder weapon, Wilson said.
On Tuesday, Jackson Lee called upon Perry to grant a
stay so that issues related to the pistol and other matters can be
sorted out. Last week, the Court of Criminal Appeals declined to
consider the defense team's gun arguments, contending they already had
been reviewed and discounted. Nation of Islam Minister Robert Muhammad
said Tuesday that he had completed a week of fasting and prayer for "God
to move hearts and minds for justice." Muhammad repeated the charge that
Newton's first trial attorney, Ron Mock, provided inadequate counsel.
Mock, whose career reached a recent low when the State Bar of Texas
suspended him, failed to interview witnesses or perform other basic
research in the case, appeals lawyers have claimed. The Court of
Criminal Appeals, however, has determined Newton received adequate
representation. "Mock," Muhammad said, "has his own wing on death row."
Noting that Houston and Texas had generated
international goodwill by welcoming tens of thousands of Hurricane
Katrina evacuees, he added that the state could "ruin that in one swoop"
with Newton's execution. He warned, too, of divine retribution for what
he deemed an unjust execution. "I fear for the state for what God might
do," he said. "If the hurricane had traveled just 2 degrees west, it
could have been here."
Divine repercussions aside, Ovide Duncantell,
director of the Black Heritage Society, predicted GOP overtures to
blacks could fall flat if Perry, a Republican, fails to act. "There will
be more damage to the Republican Party," he said. SHAPE director Deloyd
Parker urged Perry to exercise caution in going ahead with Newton's
execution. "We believe she's innocent," he said. "But if you kill her
tomorrow and you find out later that she is innocent, there's nothing
you can do to undo it. "Think about that, governor. Think about it."
Woman set to die appeals to governor, top court
By
Michael Graczyk -
The Associated Press - Wed, Sep. 14, 2005
HUNTSVILLE - The gun inside 7-year-old Alton Newton's
blue knapsack was the focus of the last-minute legal maneuvering by
appellate lawyers Tuesday trying to keep the slain boy's mother out of
the Texas death chamber.
Frances Newton, 40, is scheduled to die today for the
fatal shootings 18 years ago of Alton; her 21-month-old daughter, Farrah;
and her husband, Adrian, 23. Newton would be the 13th prisoner executed
this year in Texas but only the third woman -- and the first black woman
-- since the state resumed capital punishment in 1982.
Newton, who denies involvement in the killings, spent
Tuesday visiting with relatives at the Mountain View prison outside
Gatesville where the state's 11 condemned women are held. Gatesville is
about 140 miles northwest of Huntsville, where she will be taken if the
execution proceeds.
Her attorneys awaited word from the Supreme Court,
where they filed an appeal Monday after Texas courts, lower federal
courts and the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles rejected their
arguments that Newton is not guilty. Her attorneys also asserted that
evidence used at her trial was improperly destroyed, that the gun linked
to the slayings was not the only weapon recovered by police, and that
she has not been a problem inmate, disputing trial evidence that she
would be a continuing danger and deserved to die.
They also asked Gov. Rick Perry to invoke his
authority to issue a one-time 30-day reprieve. "It's distressing because
there are so many questions in this case," Newton told The Associated
Press in a recent interview. "And you'd hope, I hope, our court system
would want to know the answers, other than just saying: 'Oh, we believe
we're right in this.' "
Newton and a cousin found the three bodies on the
evening of April 7, 1987. Her husband had been shot in the head, the two
children in the chest. Newton acknowledges hiding a .25-caliber handgun
in Alton's knapsack at an abandoned house. Ballistics tests showed that
it was the gun used in the slayings, but her attorneys argued that it
wasn't the same weapon Newton left there, that police actually recovered
a second or third weapon, and the guns were switched.
Newton said she found the gun in a drawer at home and
hid it to keep her husband from getting into trouble. Adrian Newton had
a drug history, and the couple was having marital problems. Both had
been engaged in extramarital affairs. Newton's cousin told police about
the bag, which she saw Newton conceal.
Officers didn't record the serial number or any
distinguishing features and when shown the weapon at Newton's trial said
only that it "appeared similar," according to David Dow, one of Newton's
appeals lawyers. "When the state says Newton can be connected to a gun
that has a particular serial number, that's just a flat-out lie," Dow
said.
Prosecutors have termed the argument a smoke screen.
"The fact is, the gun that was the murder weapon was the gun she hid,"
said Roe Wilson, an assistant district attorney in Harris County. "It
was bagged by police and tagged into evidence. There is a chain of
custody. It was the only gun recovered."
In December, the parole board recommended a reprieve
for Newton so new ballistics tests could be conducted on the gun, and
Perry agreed about two hours before Newton could have been put to death.
In March, new tests confirmed the earlier findings, and Harris County
officials rescheduled her execution.
The circumstantial case also included evidence that
the blue dress Newton was wearing carried possible gunpowder residue.
She and her lawyers said the trace of nitrites came from fertilizer
rubbed on her dress by her daughter, who stayed during the day with
relatives who had a garden. Defense lawyers were unable to conduct
additional tests on the dress because it was contaminated when it was
stored unprotected with other evidence and because the initial testing
destroyed that part of the fabric.
By Marjon
Rostami -
September 14, 2005
The first black female to be executed in Texas will
receive a lethal injection at 6 p.m. today. Frances Elaine Newton, 40,
has spent the last 18 years on death row. She was convicted of murdering
her husband and two children in Houston in April 1987. Prosecutors
claimed she killed them to collect on a $50,000 life-insurance policy.
The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles voted Monday
in a 7-0 decision declining Newton's requests that the board recommend
for Gov. Rick Perry to commute her death sentence to life in prison. The
vote came two days before Newton's scheduled execution.
Rissie Owens, presiding officer of the Texas Board of
Pardons and Paroles, said in a statement that each board member gave
full consideration to Newton's clemency request. The board considered
all the information submitted from any interested parties including
prosecutors, family members and the public. He said Newton's claims of
innocence were not substantiated.
"I wish that the courts and the parole board would
have been a little less anxious to assume that everything that the state
is saying is true," David Dow, University of Houston law professor,
said. "The state is saying things that are not true."
Gov. Rick Perry granted Newton a 120-day reprieve on
Dec. 1, 2004 on her scheduled execution day to allow pardons and paroles
officials further investigation regarding the alleged murder weapon, a
.25-caliber pistol. Dow has represented Newton since the summer of 2004.
He said he did not believe Newton had access to the murder weapon, a
fact he says the state has falsified.
The National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People actively protested Newton's case at the governor's
office, said Nelson Linder, head of the Austin chapter. He said he never
once received any sort of response from state officials. NAACP protested
the case on legal and moral grounds. "Given the fact that the evidence
was not clear, and she did not have an effective council makes you
question due process," Linder said. "Race always plays a factor in any
crime in America. It is very troubling." Dow refused to comment on the
issue of race in the sentencing.
Newton's mother, father and three siblings will be
present at the execution as well as her former husband's two cousins.
According to Michelle Lyons, a spokeswoman for the
Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Newton did not request a last meal,
but one will be provided if she decides that afternoon to have one. Dow
said when he spoke to Newton Tuesday morning, she was hopeful. But her
lawyer said he knew time was running out. Since Texas reinstated the
death penalty in 1982, the state has executed 348 people. Newton will be
the third female and first black female.
By By Nicole Colson -
September 16, 2005
FRANCES NEWTON has been sitting on Texas’ death row
for the past 17 years--for a crime that she very likely did not commit.
But if Texas Gov. Rick Perry gets his way, Frances will be put to death
on September 14--the first African American woman to be executed by the
state of Texas since the Civil War. Accused of shooting her husband
Adrian and two children in 1987, Frances was railroaded onto death row
on the flimsiest of evidence--by a system that couldn’t be bothered to
look for the truth.
As the Austin Chronicle recently put it, “There is no
incontrovertible evidence against Newton, and the paltry evidence that
does exist has been completely compromised. Moreover, her story is one
more in a long line of Texas death row cases in which the prosecutions
were sloppy or dishonest, the defenses incompetent or negligent, and the
constitutional guarantee of a fair trial was honored only in name.”
Police and prosecutors--in addition to Frances’ own
incompetent trial attorney--ignored her claim that her family was
murdered by a drug dealer that her husband owed money to. Despite the
fact that an anonymous caller the day after the shooting gave a
description and license plate number of a truck parked in the driveway
of the Newton home on the night of the shooting, police never followed
up on the lead. Instead, they claim Frances was after life insurance
money--and made her their only suspect.
The physical evidence against Newton is full of
holes. “[T]here wasn't any physical evidence at all on Frances Newton,”
her new attorney David Dow told Democracy Now! “There wasn't anything at
all on her clothes. There wasn't anything at all in her car. This is
somebody who by the state's theory would have had to have killed three
people with perfect marksmanship, and then completely clean the crime
scene in such a way that investigating authorities could find no
physical evidence tying her to the scene at all, in 20 minutes.”
Because of the numerous inconsistencies in the case,
last December, Frances was granted a 120-day reprieve for the evidence
to be re-examined. But recent testing on her skirt, which prosecutors
claim places her as the shooter at the scene of the crime, couldn’t be
done--because original forensic tests had not only destroyed the
evidence, but Harris County officials had improperly stored the skirt by
sealing it inside a bag, together with items of bloody clothing, making
it worthless as evidence.
While police claim that ballistics tests confirm that
a gun they say Frances had in her possession was used as the murder
weapon, Dow says that police recovered at least two similar pistols
during their investigation of the murders--a fact that police and
prosecutors never revealed to Newton’s original lawyer.
During an interview earlier this year with a Dutch
reporter, Assistant District Attorney Roe Wilson confirmed that “police
recovered a gun from the apartment that belonged to the husband,” but
added that, “[It] had not been fired, it had not been involved in the
offense...It was simply a gun [Adrian] had there; so there is no
second-gun theory.” Wilson later claimed to have “misspoken,” saying
that there was no second gun recovered. But at least two separate
affidavits from police investigators allude to the recovery of a second
gun--though the Harris County Sheriff’s Department has refused to turn
over additional reports to Frances’ lawyers.
What’s more, in Harris County, where Frances Newton
is from, the police crime lab is notorious for botching evidence in
death penalty cases. Last year, Houston’s chief of police was forced to
call for the state to delay all executions in cases where evidence was
used that had been processed at the Harris County crime lab--after
hundreds of previously missing boxes of evidence were found that
pertained to more than 8,000 criminal cases. More recently, according to
Human Rights Watch, problems at the crime lab have included missing
evidence, defective DNA analysis and inaccurate ballistic analysis.
As Dow recently asked, “Is it plausible to think that
the Houston Police Department ballistics lab mixed up the weapons? In
view of what we know now--from faulty ballistics evidence in other
cases, to dozens of mistakes in DNA analysis, to scores of boxes of lost
or missing evidence--I would think that only the most stubborn, naive or
disingenuous prosecutor would say with any confidence that Newton is
guilty.”
Like many other inmates on death row, Frances
Newton’s defense was not just inadequate, but wholly incompetent. She
was originally “defended” by Ron Mock, a lawyer so outrageously inept
that he was later barred from taking capital cases in the state of
Texas--and has since been suspended from practicing law until the year
2007. “Death Row Mock,” as he was nicknamed--because he never won an
acquittal in a capital case, and had at least 16 clients sentenced to
death--failed to call any witnesses or do any investigation in Frances’
case. When Frances and her parents begged the trial judge to let her
change attorneys, the judge agreed--but refused to grant a continuance,
leaving he with no choice but to stick with Mock.
American Bar Association President Michael Greco has
also written to Gov. Rick Perry and the Texas Board of Pardons and
Paroles to request that Frances’ execution be stayed, citing Mock’s
gross incompetence as just one of the compelling reasons. But over the
weekend, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals rejected Frances’ latest
motion, saying that the evidence of a second gun was not “new.” The
court also has rejected claims that Frances received inadequate
representation in her first trial, and that the prosecution had
destroyed and contaminated crucial evidence
Speaking out for Frances as her execution date
approached were Tom and Virginia Louis, the parents of Frances’ murdered
husband Adrian. “We do not wish to suffer the loss of another family
member,” they wrote to the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles.
Frances’ mother, Jewel Nelms, was recently admitted
to the hospital when the stress of her daughter’s approaching execution
put her health in jeopardy “I would ask the Governor and the Board of
Pardons and Paroles to look at the facts in the case and make a true and
fair judgment--like they would want someone to do if it was their child,”
Jewel recently told Campaign to End the Death Penalty activist Lily
Hughes.
Despite her poor health, Jewel pledged to continue
fighting for Frances as the execution date loomed. “I’m hoping this is
the evidence that’s going to get us back in the courts, since we have
enough evidence now to know that there are things that are hidden that
should have been brought out in the beginning,” she said. “I know for a
fact that if the jury had known about a second gun, the verdict wouldn’t
have come out like it did...
“Everybody is really disappointed in our system here
in Houston, and knowing that they’ve hidden things for all these years
is really kind of scary. Because I don’t think they just singled out
Frances. I would like very much to ask: why did they feel the need to
hide things? That says a lot about our system...It makes me think maybe
they’ve been killing people that they could have saved, because they
were wrongfully convicted--and that is what they are trying to do to my
daughter.”
Date of Birth - April 12, 1965
Date of Offense - April 7, 1987
Age at Time of Offense - 21
Prior Occupation - Accounting
Education - 12 years
Prior Prison Record - Newton was given a concurrent
3-year sentence stemming from a probated forgery conviction in February
1986. Newton's probation was revoked upon her capital murder conviction.
Details of the Crime: Newton was convicted in the
April 1987 slaying of her husband and children for insurance money.
Killed were her husband, Adrian, 23, her son, Alton, 7, and daughter,
Farrah, 21 months. All were shot to death with a .25 caliber pistol that
belonged to Newton's boyfriend. Newton and her husband had separated
about a month prior to the killings.
Motive: In March 1987, Newton took out $50,000 life
insurance policies on Adrian, Farrah and herself. A policy already
existed on Alton's life. Newton admitted taking a gun with her to her
husband's apartment on the night of the killings, but she said she took
it for protection and that her family members were alive when she left.
Newton filed insurance claims on April 21, 1987, and
was arrested and charged with capital murder the next day.
Without Evidence: Executing Frances Newton
Another
Texas death row case marked by official carelessness, negligence, and
intransigence
By Jordan Smith -
Sept. 9, 2005
Unless the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles and Gov.
Rick Perry act to stop it, on Sept. 14 Frances Newton will become only
the third woman executed by the state of Texas since 1982, and the first
black woman executed since the Civil War.
Unique in that historical sense, in other ways the
Frances Newton case is painfully unexceptional. For there is no
incontrovertible evidence against Newton, and the paltry evidence that
does exist has been completely compromised. Moreover, her story is one
more in a long line of Texas death row cases in which the prosecutions
were sloppy or dishonest, the defenses incompetent or negligent, and the
constitutional guarantee of a fair trial was honored only in name.
As Harris Co. prosecutors tell the story, the now 40-year-old
Newton is a cold-blooded killer who murdered her husband and two young
children inside the family's apartment outside Houston on April 7, 1987,
by shooting each of them, execution-style, in order to collect life
insurance. Newton had the opportunity, they argued during her 1988 trial,
and a motive – a troubled relationship with her husband, Adrian, and the
promise of $100,000 in insurance money from policies she'd recently
taken out on his life and on the life of their 21-month-old daughter
Farrah. And she had the means, they say: a .25-caliber Raven Arms pistol
she had allegedly stolen from a boyfriend's house.
To the state, it is a simple, open-and-shut case,
which requires no further review. "Her case has been reviewed by every
possible court," Harris Co. Assistant District Attorney Roe Wilson told
the Los Angeles Times in November. "She killed her two children and her
husband. There is very, very strong evidence of that."
Yet despite Wilson's insistence, Newton's case isn't
simple at all – and such "evidence" as there is, is far from strong.
"The State's theory is simple, and it is superficially compelling,"
attorney David Dow, head of the Texas Innocence Network at the
University of Houston Law Center, argued in Newton's clemency petition,
currently pending before the Board of Pardons and Paroles. "As we will
see, however, appearances can be misleading."
From the beginning, Frances Newton has maintained her
innocence. She has also offered a plausible alternative theory of the
crime – a theory that neither police, prosecutors, nor Newton's own
trial attorney, the infamous and now suspended Ronald Mock, have ever
investigated. Newton and her defenders contend that Adrian, Farrah, and
7-year-old Alton were likely murdered by someone connected to a drug
dealer to whom Adrian owed $1,500. The alternative theory has much to
say for it – among other things, it explains the lack of physical
evidence connecting Newton to the bloody murders.
Lingering questions about the physical evidence
against Newton prompted the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles to
recommend, and Gov. Rick Perry to grant, a 120-day reprieve for Newton
on Dec. 1, 2004 – the day she was last scheduled for execution. Although
Perry said he saw no "evidence of innocence" – legally, an oxymoron – he
granted the four-month stay to allow for retesting of evidence contested
by Newton's defense, including nitrite residue on the hem of her skirt
and gun ballistics evidence.
But testing on the skirt proved impossible, because
the 1987 tests had destroyed the nitrite particles, and Harris Co. court
officials had stored the skirt by sealing it inside a bag together with
items of the victims' bloody clothing – thereby rendering it worthless
as evidence. The second round of ballistics testing, on the other hand,
supposedly confirmed a match between the gun prosecutors say Newton used
and the bullets that killed her family. However, that match may be
fundamentally undermined – because there is no certain connection
between the gun and Newton.
According to Dow, it appears that police
actually recovered at least two, and perhaps three, .25-caliber Raven
Arms pistols during their investigation of the murders – conflicting
evidence that neither the police nor the prosecutors ever revealed to
Newton's defense. Dow argues that it is virtually impossible to know
whether prosecutors have been truthful in claiming that the gun that
Newton admits to hiding on April 7, 1987, was the murder weapon. "How
many firearms were recovered and investigated in this case and who owned
them?" Dow asks in a supplemental petition filed with the BPP on Aug.
25. "How many records have been withheld from Newton's attorneys
throughout this case?"
In short, there is now even more doubt about Newton's
guilt than there was when she was granted the stay – distressing
Newton's many defenders, among them Adrian's parents, two former prison
officials, and at least one of the jurors who heard Newton's case. "We
never wanted to see Frances get executed," Adrian's parents Tom and
Virginia Louis wrote to the BPP on Aug. 25. "When the trial occurred,
nobody from the [DA's] Office ever asked ... our opinion. We were
willing to testify on Frances' behalf, but Frances' defense lawyer never
approached us," they continued. "We do not wish to suffer the loss of
another family member."
A Bloody Crime
In the months before the murders, Frances and Adrian
Newton were having marital problems. They were each involved in
extramarital relationships, and Adrian was using drugs. In an Aug. 30
Gatesville prison interview, Newton told me that in addition to smoking
marijuana, Adrian had developed a cocaine habit. "He had told me he was
using cocaine, but I'd never seen that, but I saw the effects of it,"
she recalled. "He was home later, he was irritable, less responsible."
But she and Adrian had been together since she was a
girl, and she was determined to work things out. That was on her mind on
the afternoon of April 7, 1987, when she and Adrian sat down and talked.
"We had decided that we were going to get through this together," she
said. Adrian insisted that he wasn't using anymore, so when they were
done talking and Adrian went into the living room "to watch TV ... I
decided to be nosy and see if he was being honest," she recalled.
Quietly, she opened the cabinet where he kept his stash.
"That's when I found the gun," she said. Newton said
she immediately recalled a conversation she'd heard earlier that day,
between Adrian and his brother, Sterling, who'd been staying with the
family. "I couldn't hear real close, but it sounded like they'd been in
some trouble," she said. "I thought I'd better take [the gun] out of
there because I didn't want it to be in the house ... I didn't want him
to get into any trouble." She removed the gun, placed it in a duffel bag
and took it with her when she left the apartment around 6pm to run some
errands, she says. Newton says it was the last time she saw her family
alive.
At 7pm, after a couple of errands, Newton arrived at
her cousin Sondra Nelms' house, where the two chatted and decided to
return to Newton's apartment. As Newton backed out of the drive, she saw
the duffel on the back seat and realized she needed to hide it. With
Nelms watching, Newton retrieved the bag and walked next door into a
burned and abandoned house owned by her parents, and there (as both
women later confirmed), she left the bag.
The women arrived at the apartment around 8pm, and
didn't immediately realize that anything was wrong. Newton thought
Adrian was napping – until she saw the blood. "As Frances walked around
the couch and saw his upper torso, she immediately screamed and bolted
to the children's bedroom," Nelms said in an affidavit. "Frances began
to frantically scream uncontrollably. I could not calm her down enough
to elicit the apartment's address."
Newton says she was shocked and dazed, but gave
police as much information as possible – including the fact that she'd
just removed a gun from the house. She told police about Adrian's drug
habit, and that he owed some money to a dealer – which Adrian's brother,
Terrence, corroborated, telling police he knew where the dealer lived.
Police never pursued the lead. "To your knowledge, was the alleged drug
dealer ever interviewed by anyone in connection with this case?"
Newton's attorney asked Sheriff's Officer Frank Pratt at trial. "No,"
Pratt replied.
A bullet remained lodged in Adrian's head, meaning
that the blood and brain matter would have blown back onto the gun and
shooter – confirmed by a trail of blood found in the hallway. Police
found no trace of residual nitrites (gunshot residue) on Newton's hands,
nor on the long sleeves of the sweater she was wearing. They collected
the clothing she'd worn that day. There was no blood, nor any trace of
blood, on any of the items.
Which Gun?
The next day, April 8, according to trial records,
police supposedly confirmed that the gun they had retrieved from
Newton's duffel bag in the abandoned building – at her direction –
matched the murder bullets. Yet Newton was not arrested until more than
two weeks later. Newton says that Harris Co. Sheriff's Sgt. J.J. Freeze
told her that police had actually recovered two guns; in a sworn
affidavit, Newton's father Bee Henry Nelms says Freeze told him the same
thing and added that Newton would "eventually be released." Nonetheless,
Newton was arrested two weeks later – after she filed a claim on Adrian
and Farrah's life insurance policies – and charged with the capital
murder of her 21-month-old daughter.
The state's primary evidence against her was
elementary: Newton had filed for insurance benefits, and the Department
of Public Safety forensic technicians had detected nitrite traces near
the hem of Newton's long skirt – although they couldn't say with
certainty that the nitrites were not her father's garden fertilizer
transferred earlier that day from the hands of her toddler daughter. For
physical evidence, the state relied primarily on the supposed ballistics
match to the gun Newton had hidden.
Yet in court Freeze was somewhat vague: "I believe we
talked about two pistols," he testified. "I know of one for sure, and
there was mention of a second one that Ms. Newton had purchased earlier."
There are serious questions about the prosecutors'
timeline, which would have required Newton somehow to murder her family,
clean herself of any and all blood traces and gunshot residue, and drive
to her cousin's house – all in less than 30 minutes. And since her 1988
conviction, the question of a second gun has haunted Newton's case. The
ballistics evidence was increasingly suspect in any case because of the
recent history of the Houston PD crime lab, which has been repeatedly
charged with incompetent, shoddy work, resulting in a number of
exonerations and the wholesale discrediting of the lab, which remains
under investigation. The lab's clouded reputation was one factor that
prompted Gov. Perry to accept the BPP's recommendation to grant Newton a
reprieve last winter.
Although subsequent testing supposedly confirmed the
ballistics match, the search for the second gun continued. And in June,
Dow argued in Newton's clemency petition, the truth finally began to
leak out, and from the most unlikely place: the Harris Co. District
Attorney's Office. During a brief videotaped interview with a Dutch
reporter, Assistant DA Roe Wilson inadvertently confirmed the existence
of a second gun. "Police recovered a gun from the apartment that
belonged to the husband," Wilson acknowledged. "[It] had not been fired,
it had not been involved in the offense, " she continued. "It was simply
a gun [Adrian] had there; so there is no second-gun theory."
Wilson and her boss, DA Chuck Rosenthal, quickly
retracted her admission. Wilson told the Houston Chronicle that she'd
simply "misspoken," and Rosenthal accused Dow of fabricating the idea of
a second gun "out of whole cloth." "I'm very clear," Rosenthal told The
New York Times. "One gun was recovered in the case." On Aug. 24, the
Court of Criminal Appeals agreed, dismissing Newton's most recent
appeal. "The evidence in this case was more than sufficient to establish
[Newton's] guilt," Judge Cathy Cochran wrote. "The various details that
[Newton] suggests her trial counsel should have investigated in greater
detail do not detract ... from the single crucial piece of evidence that
concerns her: she disposed of the murder weapon immediately after the
killing."
Dow and his University of Houston law students
persisted, and late last month may have succeeded. In August, Harris Co.
investigators provided testimony that police may have recovered at least
two identical .25-caliber Raven Arms pistols. In separate affidavits,
two police investigators recall tracing firearms recovered in connection
with the murders. Officer Frank Pratt told one of Dow's students that he
was assigned a gun found in the abandoned house, which he traced to a
purchase by Newton's boyfriend's cousin at a local Montgomery Ward. He
also discovered, he told student Frances Zeon, that the purchaser had
also bought a "second, identical gun"; but he didn't follow up on the
second gun, because "he felt there was no need to do so." Pratt said
he'd written up a report on the gun – a report Newton's attorneys have
never seen.
However, Newton's attorneys do have a police report
written by Detective M. Parinello, who reported he had traced yet
another firearm recovered in connection with the case to a purchase from
Rebel Distributors in Humble, Texas, which he said also ended up with
Newton's boyfriend. "The question arises: what recovered firearm was ...
Pratt investigating?" asks the clemency petition. "Counsel does not have
access to the Harris Co. Sheriff's Department's records in this case. A
request made directly to that institution for all records in connection
to its investigation of this offense was rejected."
From all this conflicting yet incomplete gun
evidence, it seems reasonable to surmise that there is no way to know
which gun was in fact the murder weapon, or which gun was delivered for
ballistics tests in 1987 or this year. Since the prosecution relied so
heavily on a weapon that Newton herself had delivered to them, the new
evidence discovered by her attorneys completely undermines her
conviction.
At press time, Harris Co. Sheriff's Office spokesman
Lt. John Martin was not able to reach Parinello or Pratt for comment but
said that a captain who worked the Newton case had said there was only
one gun recovered during the investigation. Harris Co. DA Chuck
Rosenthal reiterated that, "as far as I know" there was only one gun
recovered in the case. However, he said that even if investigators had
recovered multiple firearms, and even if each were the same brand and
caliber, the fact remains that the weapon investigators recovered from
the abandoned house, which was immediately "tagged" and "tested,"
matched the bullets recovered from the victims. "Let's say, for
conjecture's sake, that you ran down 50 or 100 guns, all associated with
the case," he said. "The fact [is] that only one fired the bullets and
that we know where that gun came from."
Criminal Defense
As in many Texas capital cases, a large part of the
problem with Newton's appeals is that her court-appointed trial attorney,
Ron Mock, never actually investigated her case. If he had, perhaps he
would've followed up the drug dealer lead or Freeze's reported comments
about a second gun. Newton and her parents implored the trial judge to
allow her to change attorneys, and Mock admitted to the judge that he
hadn't talked to any prosecution witnesses, nor had he subpoenaed any
defense witness. The judge granted the motion to remove Mock but he
declined a continuance, leaving Newton little choice but to go to trial
with Mock. "It was stunning," she told me. "[Mock gets on the stand and]
says, 'I don't know anything,' and for the judge to just dismiss it ...
it was stunning." (Mock has since been brought before the State Bar's
disciplinary board at least five times on various charges of
professional misconduct, for which he has been fined and sometimes
suspended; he is currently suspended from practicing law until late
2007.)
The Harris Co. prosecutors' defense of the conviction
has also worn thin, especially given Roe Wilson's supposed
"misstatement" about the second gun. To Newton's mother, Jewel Nelms,
Wilson's admission is no mistake. "I've known all the time that there
was a second gun," she told Houston's KPFT radio last month. "So I want
to say again, to Roe Wilson, I thank you ... very much for letting us
know, indeed, that there's somebody down there that knows about the
second gun and was willing to talk about it – even though I know it
wasn't her intention to do it."
Newton's clemency petition is still pending before
the Board of Pardons and Paroles. On Monday, Sept. 6, her attorneys
filed a petition with the state district court in Houston and the Court
of Criminal Appeals, claiming that the state's failure to disclose
evidence of a second gun violated her right to due process. At press
time, Gov. Perry's office had received more than 4,000 letters, faxes,
e-mails, and postcards regarding Newton's impending execution – most
imploring Perry to commute her death sentence to life in prison. Letters
about Newton's bid should be addressed to: The Honorable Rick Perry,
Office of the Governor, PO Box 12428, Austin, 78711-2428; and to
Chairwoman Rissie Owens, Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, Executive
Clemency Unit, PO Box 13401, Austin, 78711.
Frances Elaine Newton could soon be the first African
American woman executed in modern Texas history despite resounding
questions of whether she is guilty and whether she received a fair trial.
Almost half of those on Texas' death row are African
American, yet they are only 12 per cent of the population. Newton is
from Harris County, where the Houston Police Crime Lab has botched so
many cases that even the police chief and a state senator have asked the
governor to halt executions from Harris County.
What to DO?
New actions planned, new materials available.
1. Get and mail a postcard to Governor Rick Perry; distribute to people
you know.
2. See Coming Events for more to do.
3. Be creative! Help in your own way. Call or write the media. Ask
questions in public. Bring it up at church.
AUDIO & VIDEO FILES ONLINE
SCHEDULED EXECUTION: SEPTEMBER 14
*** URGENT *** LESS THAN 1 DAY TO SAVE FRANCES
NOW: e-mail multiple selected elected officials at
ONCE !!! or
Download, sign, circulate and FAX the new PETITION TO
STOP THE EXECUTION! or
Send mail in old-fashioned ways
PRAYERS FOR FRANCES, September 14, 2005 at the
Astrodome, Kirby and McNee, 12:30-2:00 pm
The president of the AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION has
written a letter to Texas officials calling for a STAY of execution! (Read
the Letter) (RTF document) No more victims. PLEASE!
Letter to the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles from
the parents of Adrian, grandparents of Alton and Farrah:
"Frances is part of our family.
"
MILLER, Judge. Appellant was convicted of capital
murder. See V.T.C.A., Penal Code, Section 19.03(a)(6). After the jury
made an affirmative finding on both of the special issues submitted
under Article 37.071(b)(1) and (2), V.A.C.C.P., the trial court imposed
the penalty of death. This case is before us on direct appeal. Article
37.071(h), V.A.C.C.P.
Because appellant contests the sufficiency of
evidence to sustain her conviction, we will review the facts of her
case. On the evening of April 7, 1987 at 8:27 p.m., Deputy R.W. Ricks
was dispatched to an apartment complex at 6126 West Mount Houston in
response to a possible shooting. Appellant was at the location, along
with her cousin, Sondra Nelms. Lying on a couch in appellant's apartment,
Ricks found the body of Adrian Newton, appellant's husband, with a
bullet wound to the head, and the bodies of Alton Newton, seven years
old, and Farrah Newton, twenty-one months old, appellant's children,
both of whom had died from gunshot wounds to the chest. There were no
signs of forced entry into the apartment, nor any signs of a struggle.
Earlier the same evening, between 7:00 and 7:30 p.m.,
appellant arrived in an automobile at Sondra Nelms' residence at 6524
Sealy. Appellant asked Sondra to come over to appellant's apartment to
visit. Before leaving Sondra's house, appellant took a blue bag out of
her car and put it in an abandoned house which belonged to her parents,
located next door at 6520 Sealy. Upon arrival at appellant's apartment,
they found appellant's husband and two children dead. Later that evening,
homicide detective Michael Talton spoke with Nelms, who took him to the
house at 6520 Sealy. Inside he found a blue bag containing a blue steel
Raven Arms .25 automatic, which he turned over to a crime scene officer.
The gun's owner, Michael Mouton, had loaned the gun
to his cousin, Jeffrey Frelow, five or six months prior to the murders.
Jeffrey Frelow had known appellant since junior high school, and began
to have a sexual relationship with her approximately one to two months
prior to the murders. Frelow identified the gun and indicated that he
kept it in a chest of drawers in his master bedroom. Because she often
did Frelow's laundry, appellant had access to the drawers and to the gun.
On April 8, 1987, appellant accompanied Detective
Michael Parinello during a search of her apartment, where she pointed
out the clothing she wore the day of the murders. Parinello collected
the clothing and delivered it to the Department of Public Safety Crime
Laboratory to test for possible gunpowder residue. Sterling Duane
Newton, the brother of the deceased Adrian Newton, was also living at
the apartment where the murders occurred, and was present on the evening
of April 7, 1987.
When Sterling arrived at the apartment at 5:30 or
6:00, appellant was there. Appellant requested that Sterling leave the
apartment to give her some time alone with Adrian to talk over their
marital problems. Sterling remained at the apartment for approximately
an hour to an hour and a half before leaving.
Ramona Bell, a long time acquaintance of the deceased,
Adrian Newton, had been dating him for some time prior to April 7, 1987.
Bell knew that appellant and Adrian were on bad terms. Bell testified
that on April 7, 1987, she called Adrian from work at approximately 6:45
p.m., and appellant answered the telephone. Bell then spoke to Adrian
for about fifteen minutes. During the telephone conversation Adrian told
Bell that he was tired and was going to go to sleep, but not until
appellant left, because he did not trust appellant.
Alphonse Harrison, a friend of Adrian Newton, had
seen him earlier in the day on April 7, 1987, and the two made plans to
get together that night. Harrison testified that he called Adrian
between 7:00 and 7:15 that evening, and appellant answered the telephone.
Harrison never got to talk to Adrian because appellant put him on hold
and left him holding for possibly 45 minutes. Harrison hung up but
continued to call back and finally got an answer around 9:00 p.m., when
appellant's cousin answered the telephone and told him that Adrian had
been shot.
Claudia Chapman was working for a State Farm
Insurance agent when she met appellant in September 1986. Appellant came
in for automobile insurance, and Chapman talked to her about purchasing
life insurance. On March 18, 1987, appellant purchased a fifty thousand
dollar life insurance policy on herself, another on her husband, Adrian,
and a third on her daughter, Farrah.
According to the insurance
applications, appellant was the primary beneficiary on the latter two
policies, which became effective immediately. Both appellant and her
mother had made claims on the policies as of the time of the trial of
this cause.
A ballistics expert established that the pistol recovered by
Officer Talton was the murder weapon. A forensics expert for the State
established that nitrites were present on appellant's skirt. In the
expert's opinion, the nitrites came from gunpowder residue, and were
consistent with someone shooting a pistol in the lower front area of the
skirt. He testified that another possible source of nitrites would be
fertilizer. A forensic expert for appellant confirmed that nitrites
could come from fertilizer.
In her twenty-ninth point of error appellant contends
that the evidence is insufficient to sustain her conviction. When
reviewing the record for evidentiary sufficiency our standard is set out
in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560
(1979): "The relevant question is whether after viewing the evidence in
the light most favorable to the [verdict], any rational trier of fact
could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable
doubt." Jackson, 443 U.S. at 319, 99 S.Ct. at 2789, 61 L.Ed.2d at 573.
This standard applies to direct as well as circumstantial evidence
cases. Butler v. State, 769 S.W.2d 234, 238 (Tex.Cr.App.1989). However,
in applying the Jackson standard to circumstantial evidence cases
decided prior to our decision in Geesa v. State, 820 S.W.2d 154 (Tex.Cr.App.1991)
[FN1] we have adopted as a tool for analysis of circumstantial evidence
case the following "analytical construct": that the evidence must
exclude every other outstanding reasonable hypothesis other than the
guilt of the accused. Carlsen v. State, 654 S.W.2d 444, 449 (Tex.Cr.App.1983),
overruled in part by Geesa, see note 1, infra.
Appellant maintains that the evidence against her is
circumstantial and that it does not rule out the reasonable hypothesis
that someone other than appellant committed the murders of her husband
and children. At trial, appellant testified that on the day of the
murders she picked up her children after work and came home at around
4:30 p.m. Her husband's brother, Sterling, came in at 5:00 p.m. She
testified that she and her husband decided to reconcile their
differences. She would stop seeing Jeffrey Frelow and he was to "stop
doing whatever he was doing[.]" [FN2]
Then they made love while the children played in the
bedroom. Later she changed out of the clothes that were subsequently
determined to contain traces of nitrites. She left the apartment about
6:00 p.m. in order to pay her automobile insurance. Before leaving she
removed the handgun, that was ultimately determined to be the murder
weapon, from its location in a kitchen cabinet, and she placed it in her
purse. She denied ever having seen the gun before. She denied knowing
that Frelow owned a handgun.
Appellant testified that she took the gun
because she had overheard a conversation between her husband, Adrian,
and Sterling in which mention was made of some trouble involving Adrian.
Appellant maintains that she was trying to prevent the trouble. She
drove to the place where she thought the insurance company was located,
but it had moved.
Then, around 7:00 p.m., she went to her cousin
Sondra's house. She stayed away from her apartment because she not only
wanted to talk to Sondra but also she wanted to leave Adrian and
Sterling alone so that they could talk. Appellant testified that she and
Sondra subsequently went back to the apartment; however, prior to
leaving Sondra's residence, appellant took the gun, which she had put in
a knapsack, and placed it in the abandoned house next door.
She
testified that she did this because, if her family had seen the gun,
they would have thought that Adrian was in some kind of trouble. Upon
arriving home she noticed that the front door was slightly ajar. A short
time later she discovered the bodies of her husband and children.
On cross-examination, appellant testified that she
was aware that her husband had "cheated" on her during her marriage and
that this fact embarrassed her. After discovering her husband with
another woman earlier in the year, she may have said that if she caught
him "running around" on her again she would kill him.
She admitted that
she was aware, prior to the killings, that her insurance company had
moved to another location. She acknowledged that both Alphonse Harrison
and Ramona Bell testified that they had called her residence around 7:00
to 7:30 p.m. and that she had answered the telephone, although she
denied that Harrison was correct about the time or that she had ever
talked to Bell.
She denied knowing Bell, although she had heard that
Bell and her husband were having a relationship. Appellant suggests that
"the window of opportunity [to commit the murders] was quite wide" [FN3]
and, therefore, the evidence supports a reasonable hypothesis that
someone other than appellant is the guilty party. We disagree. It is
evident, when we look at the record in the light most favorable to the
verdict, that the jury did not find appellant's hypothesis at all
reasonable.
The evidence shows that the murders were committed sometime
between approximately 7:00 p.m. and 8:27 p.m. on April 7, 1987.
Appellant was at the scene of the crime at around 7:00 p.m. Appellant
was in possession of the murder weapon and attempted to hide it. Gunshot
residue was found on appellant's clothes. [FN4]
Appellant and her
deceased husband were having marital problems, and, just a few weeks
prior to the murders, she had taken out life insurance policies on her
husband and one of her children. Appellant admitted that she may have
said she would kill her husband if she once more caught him "running
around." Appellant's alibi evidence is contradicted by two State's
witnesses whom the jury evidently chose to believe. Clearly, on the
strength of these facts, a rational trier of fact could conclude that
the only reasonable hypothesis was that appellant committed all three
murders. Appellant's twenty-ninth point of error is overruled.
* * *
Point of error twenty-four concerns an argument by
the State to the jury during the punishment phase. Dr. Charles Covert
testified in response to a hypothetical that, in his opinion, appellant
would constitute a continuing threat to society because of the
probability that she would commit future acts of violence.
The
prosecutor asked Dr. Covert on what he based his opinion, and
appellant's counsel objected that the question called for speculation
and conclusion. The court did not rule on the objection, and the
prosecutor did not pursue the line of questioning.
During appellant's
closing argument counsel told the jury that, with respect to Covert's
opinion, the doctor knew what his answer would be before he was asked
the hypothetical question because "his mind was made up." Appellant
argued that the jury should give the doctor no credibility. In reply,
the State argued that appellant had the opportunity to attack Covert's
credibility while he was on the stand but chose not to do so because the
doctor's forensic experience would have made him immune to an attack on
credibility.
The State pointed out that they had offered to put in
evidence the doctor's basis for his opinion. The prosecutor then said, "Mr.
Mock's response: I object. He didn't want you to know what the doctor
based it on. He didn't touch that evidence." Appellant objected but was
overruled. Appellant argues that the State was going outside the record
and the trial court should have sustained her objection. We disagree.
The record clearly demonstrates that appellant's attack on Covert's
credibility put in issue the basis for the doctor's opinion and invited
the State's response. The State was properly allowed to reply to
counsel's argument. Point of error twenty-four is overruled.
In point of error twenty-five, appellant contends
that the trial court erred by overruling her objection to another of the
State's arguments to the jury during the punishment phase of trial. The
State, in arguing that the defendant was a future danger to society,
said, "Then she [appellant] goes to her little boy. It's reasonable to
infer from the evidence that he heard the shot [that killed Adrian
Newton]. 'Mama, what is going on?' That is, just lay on the bed there,
son. 'Mama, what is going on?' " Appellant's counsel objected that this
was outside the record. The objection was overruled.
Appellant now
argues that the trial court erred, but the State replies that the
remarks are a reasonable inference from the evidence. We agree with the
State. It is well settled that "counsel may draw from the facts in
evidence all inferences that are reasonable, fair, and legitimate."
Allridge v. State, 762 S.W.2d 146, 156 (Tex.Cr.App.1988), cert. denied,
489 U.S. 1040, 109 S.Ct. 1176, 103 L.Ed.2d 238 (1989). It would be a
fair inference that appellant shot her husband while he slept, and that
her seven year old son heard the shot and wondered what was happening.
We note that counsel specifically informed the jury that his argument
was in the nature of a reasonable inference; thus, there was no danger
that the prosecutor's comments could have been interpreted by the jury
as a statement of evidence in the record. Appellant's twenty-fifth point
of error is overruled.
Background: Petitioner, convicted in state court of
capital murder and sentenced to death, 1992 WL 175742, sought federal
habeas relief. The United States District Court for the Southern
District of Texas, Kenneth M. Hoyt, J., denied petition. Petitioner
moved for certificate of appealability.
Holdings: The Court of Appeals, W. Eugene Davis,
Circuit Judge, held that:
(1) trial court's refusal to continue trial to allow petitioner's
counsel of choice to prepare did not violate due process, and
(2) special issues on deliberateness and future dangerousness submitted
to jury during penalty phase, under Texas law, did not violate Penry.
Certificate of appealability denied.
W. EUGENE DAVIS, Circuit Judge:
Petitioner Frances Elaine Newton was convicted of capital murder in
Texas and sentenced to death. She now seeks a certificate of
appealability from the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief.
Because Newton has failed to make a substantial showing of a denial of a
constitutional right, we deny her application for COA.
Newton was convicted and sentenced to death in
October 1988 for the capital offense of murdering her young daughter in
the same criminal transaction as the murders of her husband and young
son. On direct appeal, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the
conviction and sentence. Newton v. State, No. 70,770, 1992 WL 175742 (Tex.Crim.App.
June 17, 1992)(unpublished opinion). The Supreme Court denied Newton's
petition for writ of certiorari, Newton v. Texas, 509 U.S. 926, 113 S.Ct.
3045, 125 L.Ed.2d 730 (1993), and denied rehearing, Newton v. Texas, 509
U.S. 945, 114 S.Ct. 26, 125 L.Ed.2d 776 (1993). Newton filed a state
application for writ of habeas corpus. The trial court entered findings
of fact and conclusions of law recommending denial of relief. The Court
of Criminal Appeals adopted the trial court's findings and denied relief.
Ex Parte Newton, Application No. 47,025-01 (Tex.Crim.App.Dec.6, 2000).
Newton filed her federal habeas petition in December 2001, raising five
claims for relief. In August 2003, the district court granted the
Director's motion for summary judgment, denying habeas relief and
denying a COA. Newton timely appealed. Newton now seeks a COA from this
court.
The Court of Criminal Appeals summarized the relevant
facts of the crime in its opinion on direct appeal: On the evening of
April 7, 1987 at 8:27 p.m., Deputy R.W. Ricks was dispatched to an
apartment complex at 6126 West Mount Houston in response to a possible
shooting. Appellant was at the location, along with her cousin, Sondra
Nelms.
Lying on a couch in appellant's apartment, Ricks found the body
of Adrian Newton, appellant's husband, with a bullet wound to the head,
and the bodies of Alton Newton, seven years old, and Farrah Newton,
twenty-one months old, appellant's children, both of whom had died from
gunshot wounds to the chest. There were no signs of forced entry into
the apartment, nor any signs of a struggle.
Earlier the same evening,
between 7:00 and 7:30 p.m., appellant arrived in an automobile at Sondra
Nelms' residence at 6524 Sealy. Appellant asked Sondra to come over to
appellant's apartment to visit. Before leaving Sondra's house, appellant
took a blue bag out of her car and put it in an abandoned house which
belonged to her parents, located next door at 6520 Sealy. Upon arrival
at appellant's apartment, they found appellant's husband and two
children dead.
Later that evening, homicide detective Michael Talton
spoke with Nelms, who took him to the house at 6520 Sealy. Inside he
found a blue bag containing a blue steel Raven Arms .25 automatic, which
he turned over to a crime scene officer.
The gun's owner, Michael Mouton, had loaned the gun
to his cousin, Jeffrey Frelow, five or six months prior to the murders.
Jeffrey Frelow had known appellant since junior high school, and began
to have a sexual relationship with her approximately one to two months
prior to the murders. Frelow identified the gun and indicated that he
kept it in a chest of drawers in his master bedroom. Because she often
did Frelow's laundry, appellant had access to the drawers and to the gun.
On April 8, 1987, appellant accompanied Detective
Michael Parinello during a search of her apartment, where she pointed
out the clothing she wore the day of the murders. Parinello collected
the clothing and delivered it to the Department of Public Safety Crime
Laboratory to test for possible gunpowder residue. Sterling Duane
Newton, the brother of the deceased Adrian Newton, was also living at
the apartment where the murders occurred, and was present on the evening
of April 7, 1987.
When Sterling arrived at the apartment at 5:30 or
6:00, appellant was there. Appellant requested that Sterling leave the
apartment to give her some time alone with Adrian to talk over their
marital problems. Sterling remained at the apartment for approximately
an hour to an hour and a half before leaving. Ramona Bell, a long time
acquaintance of the deceased, Adrian Newton, had been dating him for
some time prior to April 7, 1987. Bell knew that appellant and Adrian
were on bad terms.
Bell testified that on April 7, 1987, she called
Adrian from work at approximately 6:45 p.m., and appellant answered the
telephone. Bell then spoke to Adrian for about fifteen minutes. During
the telephone conversation Adrian told Bell that he was tired and was
going to go to sleep, but not until appellant left, because he did not
trust appellant.
Alphonse Harrison, a friend of Adrian Newton, had
seen him earlier in the day on April 7, 1987, and the two made plans to
get together that night. Harrison testified that he called Adrian
between 7:00 and 7:15 that evening, and appellant answered the telephone.
Harrison never got to talk to Adrian because appellant put him on hold
and left him holding for possibly 45 minutes. Harrison hung up but
continued to call back and finally got an answer around 9:00 p.m., when
appellant's cousin answered the telephone and told him that Adrian had
been shot.
Claudia Chapman was working for a State Farm
Insurance agent when she met appellant in September 1986. Appellant came
in for automobile insurance, and Chapman talked to her about purchasing
life insurance. On March 18, 1987, appellant purchased a fifty thousand
dollar life insurance policy on herself, another on her husband, Adrian,
and a third on her daughter, Farrah. According to the insurance
applications, appellant was the primary beneficiary on the latter two
policies, which became effective immediately. Both appellant and her
mother had made claims on the policies as of the time of the trial of
this cause.
A ballistics expert established that the pistol
recovered by Officer Talton was the murder weapon. A forensics expert
for the State established that nitrites were present on appellant's
skirt. In the expert's opinion, the nitrites came from gunpowder residue,
and were consistent with someone shooting a pistol in the lower front
area of the skirt. He testified that another possible source of nitrites
would be fertilizer. A forensic expert for appellant confirmed that
nitrites could come from fertilizer. Additional facts necessary to the
issues will be presented in the sections that follow.
* * *
For the reasons stated above, we deny Newton's
Application for COA.