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.
William Dillard
POWELL
Classification: Murderer
Characteristics:
Robbery
- Drugs
Number of victims: 1
Date of murder:
October 31,
1991
Date
of arrest:
November 16,
1991
Date of birth:
September 25,
1946
Victim profile: Mary Gladden,
54 (convenience store clerk)
Method of murder:
Beating with a tire iron
Location: Cleveland County, North Carolina, USA
Status:
Executed
by lethal injection in North Carolina on March 11,
2005
Summary:
A veteran who had no prior criminal record, seeking cash to support
a cocaine addiction, attempted to rob a convenience store in Shelby
unarmed on Halloween in 1991.
When the clerk, 54 year old Mary Gladden, resisted, Powell picked up
a tire iron kept under the counter and beat Gladden to death.
Powell was later identified by another customer and upon arrest
confessed to the murder.
Citations:
Powell v. Lee, 282 F.Supp.2d 355 (4th Cir. 2003). (Habeas)
State v. Powell, 459 S.E.2d 219 (N.C. 1995). (Direct Appeal)
Final Meal:
At 5:30 p.m. Thursday night he had his last meal: A medium, thin-crust
pizza with pepperoni, mushrooms and Canadian bacon, and a hamburger
with mustard, chili and onions and a 20-ounce Pepsi.
Final Words:
None.
ClarkProsecutor.org
Powell, William Dillard
DOC Number: 0329098
DOB: 09-25-46
RACE: WHITE
SEX: MALE
DATE OF SENTENCING: 04-29-93
COUNTY OF CONVICTION: CLEVELAND COUNTY
William Powell - Chronology of
Events
3/11/2004 - William Powell executed at 2 a.m.
Powell is pronounced dead at 2:09 am.
3/10/2004 - Governor Michael Easley denies
clemency.
3/10/2004 - U.S. Supreme Court denies application
for stay of execution and petition for writ of certiorari.
3/9/2004 - Powell's petition for writ of
certiorari and petition for writ of habeas corpus, along with the
application for stay of execution were denied by the Supreme Court
of North Carolina
3/9/2004 - Witnesses named for Powell execution.
1/24/2005 - Correction Secretary Theodis Beck
sets an execution date of March 11, 2005
1/10/2005 - U.S. Supreme Court denies Powell's
petition for a writ of certiorari.
7/28/1995 - North Carolina Supreme Court affirms
Powell's conviction and sentence of death.
4/29/1993 - William Dillard Powell sentenced to
death in Cleveland County Superior Court for the first degree murder
of Mary Gladden.
GOV. EASLEY DENIES CLEMENCY IN
POWELL CASE
Release: IMMEDIATE
Raleigh -
Gov. Michael F. Easley today denied the clemency petition filed by
William Dillard Powell, a convicted murderer scheduled for execution
at 2:00 a.m. on Friday, March 11, 2005.
Powell is on death row for the October 31, 1991
beating death of Mary Gladden, a Cleveland County resident. Powell
was also convicted of robbery with a dangerous weapon. “Having
carefully reviewed the clemency petition, I conclude that there are
no compelling reasons to invalidate the sentence recommended by the
jury and affirmed by the courts,” Easley said.
North Carolina Department of Correction
For Release: IMMEDIATE
Contact: Pamela Walker
Date: March 9, 2005
Phone: (919) 716-3700
Witnesses selected for William D. Powell
execution
RALEIGH- Witnesses have been named for the
execution of William D. Powell, who is scheduled to die by lethal
injection March 11 at 2 a.m. at Central Prison in Raleigh. Powell
was convicted in Cleveland County and sentenced to death for the
1991 murder of Mary Gladden.
Official Witnesses
William C. Young – District Attorney, Cleveland County
Richard L. Shaffer – Assistant District Attorney, Cleveland County
Lt. Rick Beaver – Cleveland County Sheriff’s Office
Lt. David Frank Crow – Cleveland County Sheriff’s Office
Keith Carroll – Victim’s family member
Ricky Carroll – Victim’s family member
Media Witnesses
Bill Holmes – Associated Press
Tracey Early – News 14 Carolina, Raleigh
Amelia Townsend – The Shelby Star
For Release: IMMEDIATE
Contact: Pamela Walker
Date: January 24, 2005
Phone: (919) 716-3700
Execution date set for William Dillard Powell
RALEIGH - Correction Secretary Theodis Beck has
set March 11, 2005 as the execution date for inmate William Dillard
Powell. The execution is scheduled for 2:00 a.m. at Central Prison
in Raleigh.
Powell, 58, was sentenced to death April 29, 1993
in Cleveland County Superior Court for the Oct. 31, 1991 murder of
Mary Gladden.
Central Prison Warden Marvin Polk will explain
the execution procedures during a media tour scheduled for Monday,
March 7 at 10:00 a.m. Interested media representatives should arrive
at Central Prison’s visitor center promptly at 10:00 a.m. on the
tour date. The session will last approximately one hour.
The media tour will be the only opportunity to
photograph the execution chamber and deathwatch area before the
execution. Journalists who plan to attend the tour should contact
the Department of Correction Public Affairs Office at (919) 716-3700
by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, March 4.
William Dillard Powell (September
25, 1946 – March 11, 2005), a 58-year-old white male,
was executed by lethal injection at the Central
Prison in Raleigh, North Carolina on March 11, 2005.
Powell was found guilty of the 1991 murder of Mary
Gladden, a 54-year-old white female. Powell, who was
45-years old when he committed the capital crime,
was sentenced to death on April 29, 1993.
Mary Gladden was an employee of
The Pantry on Charles Road in Shelby, North
Carolina. She was killed on October 31, 1991, while
on duty at The Pantry. On that day between 3:15 a.m.
and 3:30 a.m. Scott Truelove bought $5 worth of
gasoline at The Pantry. While paying at the counter
he stood near a rough-looking man with unkempt,
shoulder-length hair, facial hair, and a tattoo on
his left forearm.
The next morning, November 1,
Truelove read about the murder and gave a
description of the man to Captain Ledbetter of the
Shelby Police Department. On November 16 Truelove
identified Powell as the man by picking him out of a
photographic lineup.
At approximately 4:15 a.m. on
October 31 Clarissa Epps stopped at The Pantry to
buy gasoline. She went in to pay for her purchase
and after waiting in vain for a clerk to appear
called out but received no answer. Epps, after
seeing Gladden lying in blood behind the counter,
drove home and called police.
On the 31st, in response to a
radio dispatch, Officer Mark Lee of the Shelby
Police Department arrived at The Pantry at 4:26 a.m.
Lee first ensured that all customers had left the
store and then found Gladden behind the counter. She
was lying on her back in a pool of blood with her
head toward the cash register and her hands at her
sides. Lee noticed injuries to her left eye and ear
as well as other injuries to her head. He also saw a
one-dollar bill on the floor near her left foot and
another on the counter.
Dr. Stephen Tracey, who performed
the autopsy, testified that Gladden had numerous
lacerations on her head and that her skull was
fractured in several places. Gladden’s nose was
broken and her left eye had been displaced by a
fracture to the bone behind it. Her brain had
hemorrhaged, was bruised and lacerated in several
places, and contained skull fragments.
Tracey determined that blunt
trauma to the head caused Gladden’s death and that
she died from the trauma before she lost a fatal
amount of blood. He also concluded that human hands
had not inflicted the wounds, surmising from their
size and shape that the perpetrator had used a lug-nut
wrench, a tire wrench, or possibly a pipe.
Mark Stewart, an employee of The
Pantry, testified that he worked on both October 27
and November 1. On the 27th Stewart saw a tire tool
behind the counter to the side of the cash register.
The tool had lain there for approximately one year.
It was curved on one end with a round hole for a lug
nut and was split on the other end for hubcap
removal. Stewart noticed that the tool was missing
when he worked on the 1st of November.
Thomas Tucker, a district manager
of The Pantry, testified that he arrived at The
Pantry sometime after 6:00 a.m. on October 31. He
examined the cash register tape for that morning and
it showed, among other transactions, a gasoline sale
of $5 at 3:29 a.m. and a no-sale at 3:35 a.m. The
cash register enters a no-sale when it is opened but
no purchase is made.
According to the tape no
transaction occurred between the $5 purchase and the
no-sale. Tucker opened the register at 6:22 a.m. at
the direction of Captain Ledbetter to determine
whether any money had been taken during the homicide.
He concluded that approximately $48 was missing.
On November 16 Lieutenant Mark
Cherka and Officer David Lail drove to Anthony's
Trailer Park to find Powell and bring him to the
police station for questioning. Powell came out of a
trailer and allowed Cherka to take four photographs
of him. He agreed to accompany Cherka and Lail to
the police station for questioning as a possible
suspect in a murder. Powell was told that he did not
have to leave with them, as he was not under arrest
at that time.
Powell and the officers arrived
at the police station at approximately 4:00 p.m.
whereupon Cherka began questioning Powell. Powell
refused to allow Cherka to tape record the interview
so Cherka made notes of what transpired shortly
after the interview ended. Powell stated that he had
gone to sleep at around 4:00 a.m. on the 31st of
October after drinking with Don Weathers and
Powell's girlfriend, Lori Yelton. Later that morning
Yelton and Powell took Weathers to the hospital
because he had cut himself at some point during the
previous night.
Cherka left the interview room
and related Powell's statement to Ledbetter. While
Cherka had been questioning Powell Truelove had
identified Powell from a lineup containing thirty-two
photographs as the man he saw in The Pantry on
October 31. Ledbetter informed Cherka of the
identification and then accompanied Cherka back into
the interview room.
Powell again indicated he did not
want to be tape-recorded and Ledbetter complied.
Ledbetter told Powell about Truelove's
identification and asked him if he wanted an
attorney. Powell stated that he had not killed
anyone and did not want an attorney. Ledbetter
advised Powell of his Miranda rights and Powell
signed a waiver of those rights thereafter
continuing to deny involvement in the murder.
Ledbetter then told him he knew
Powell had killed Gladden and asked, "Why did you
kill her?" Powell hung his head and answered, "She
slapped me and I went off on her." Powell then asked
to speak to Ledbetter alone and Cherka left the room.
Ledbetter again asked Powell why he had killed
Gladden. Powell stated that she had slapped him, he
had panicked, he had not intended to harm her, and
he merely wanted the money from the cash register.
Powell indicated that he wanted
to speak to Ledbetter off the record. He asked him
to tear up the Miranda waiver form, which Ledbetter
ripped into four pieces. Powell then related
additional details about the crime including
information about the weapon he had used. At about
6:00 p.m. Powell asked for a lawyer and one was
contacted for him. Powell was then arrested and
taken into custody after he conferred with his
lawyer.
Powell testified that he did not
read the Miranda waiver form but signed it because
he felt "agreeable" from cocaine he had ingested. He
further testified that Ledbetter suggested they talk
off the record. Powell further admitted he had given
Miranda warnings during his tenure as a jailer in
law enforcement and recited the warnings on the
witness stand. He also admitted he had not mentioned
in his pretrial affidavit that Ledbetter proposed
that they talk off the record.
Billy Joe Sparks testified that
sometime after the Gladden murder he had a
conversation with Paul Barnard, who called himself
Rambo. During the conversation Rambo sniffed glue
and both men drank beer. Rambo told Sparks he had
killed a woman at a supermarket by beating her to
death. Rambo died before Powell's trial and Sparks
did not tell police about Rambo's statement until
after his death.
Johnny Smith, the operator of a
local entertainment center, testified that he had
spoken to Truelove about the murder. Smith stated
that Truelove told him he had seen a man with red
hair in The Pantry on the day of the murder.
Truelove testified that he knew
Rambo and that the lineup from which he identified
Powell contained a photograph of Rambo. Truelove
never picked Rambo as the person he saw at The
Pantry on October 31 adding that he remembered
having a conversation with Smith about becoming an
uncle, and not about the murder. Truelove and his
sister both have red hair, and his sister had
recently given birth to a baby with red hair.
The State also called Officer
James Glover of the Shelby Police Department in
rebuttal. Glover testified that Rambo claimed to be
a Vietnam veteran and to have a black belt in
karate—neither claim was true. Before his death
Rambo had telephoned Glover and told him he had lied
to Sparks about committing the murder. He said he
told Sparks he had killed a woman only to maintain
his street image.
A Cleveland County jury found
Powell guilty of first-degree murder under the
felony murder rule, with robbery with a dangerous
weapon as the underlying felony. At sentencing the
same jury found that the murder was committed for
pecuniary gain and no mitigating circumstance, and
unanimously recommended the death sentence. On March
10, 2005, Governor Michael F. Easley denied clemency.
N.C. man is executed for '91 murder; Clemency
denied in beating death
By Andrea Weigl - Raleigh News & Observer
March 11, 2005
RALEIGH, N.C. -- A Shelby man was executed early
today for the Halloween 1991 slaying of a convenience store clerk.
William Dillard "Bugsy" Powell, 58, had been sentenced to death by
lethal injection for the beating death of Mary Gladden. Gov. Mike
Easley denied a petition for clemency Thursday evening, after the
U.S. Supreme Court had rejected a stay of execution.
In 1991, Gladden, who worked at The Pantry in
Shelby, tried to stop an unarmed Powell from robbing the store. She
was hit over the head with what is thought to have been a tire iron,
which was kept in the store but never recovered afterward. Powell's
motive for the robbery was to get money to buy cocaine. He was
convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death after a 1993
trial.
Powell's lawyers tried to prevent his execution
by questioning the fairness of a death sentence for what they see as
a less egregious murder. They also wanted a hearing on whether
prosecutors violated Powell's rights at trial by failing to reveal a
deal to dismiss a felony against a key witness. The alleged
prosecutorial misconduct was discovered only a few weeks ago and was
not evaluated by a judge. Those arguments did not persuade the
Supreme Court.
Neither Cleveland County District Attorney Bill
Young nor Gladden's relatives returned calls asking for comment.
Young, two of Gladden's relatives, Keith and Ricky Carroll, and
several investigators planned to witness the execution, scheduled
for 2 a.m. at Central Prison in Raleigh.
For his last meal, Powell drank a 20-ounce Pepsi
and ate a hamburger with mustard, chili and onions and a medium thin
crust pizza with pepperoni, mushrooms and Canadian bacon.
Before the 1991 slaying, Powell had been
honorably discharged from the Army and served as a volunteer with
the rescue squad of the Shelby Fire Department, his lawyers say. He
was an excellent caregiver to his autistic son and even helped the
PTA at his son's school, they say. However, his lawyers say,
Powell's life took a downward turn as he succumbed to drug and
alcohol abuse. On the night of the killing, Powell was high on
cocaine and Xanax, an anti-anxiety drug, they say.
Prior to his decision, Easley had heard a request
for clemency from Peter Bearman, chairman of the sociology
department at Columbia University. In 1997, Bearman, then a
professor of sociology at UNC-Chapel Hill, analyzed more than 100
death penalty cases across the state between 1978 and 1995. Based on
factors identified by the N.C. Supreme Court, he evaluated -- in
layman's terms -- whether the sentences fit the crimes. Bearman
decided that Powell's sentence didn't seem to fit, or that other
murder cases with similar facts resulted in life sentences.
Until a month ago, Bearman had no connection to
Powell's case. Powell was featured in Bearman's report, but the
professor had been hired by another lawyer who hoped the analysis
would help another death row inmate. After learning Powell was set
to be executed, Bearman came to Raleigh to ask Easley to grant
clemency.
ProDeathPenalty.com
William Powell was convicted of the first-degree
murder of Mary Gladden, an employee of The Pantry on Charles Road in
Shelby, and sentenced to death. The State's evidence tended to show
that Mary Gladden was killed on October 31, 1991 while on duty at
The Pantry.
Scott Truelove testified that he bought five
dollars' worth of gasoline there between 3:15 and 3:30 a.m. At the
counter he stood near a rough-looking man with unkempt, shoulder-length
hair, facial hair, and a tattoo on his left forearm. The next
morning Truelove read about the murder and gave a description of the
man to Captain Ledbetter of the Shelby Police Department. On
November 16, 1991 Truelove identified Powell as the man by picking
him out of a photographic lineup.
On October 31, 1991 Clarissa Epps stopped at The
Pantry to buy gasoline at approximately 4:15 a.m. She went in to pay
for her purchase. After waiting in vain for a clerk to appear, Epps
called out but received no answer. Epps then turned and saw Mary
lying in blood behind the counter. Epps drove home and called the
police.
Officer Mark Lee of the Shelby Police Department
arrived at The Pantry at 4:26 a.m. in response to a radio dispatch.
Lee first ensured that all customers had left the store and then
found Mary behind the counter. She was lying on her back in a pool
of blood with her head toward the cash register and her hands at her
sides. Lee noticed injuries to Mary's left eye and ear as well as
other injuries to her head. He also saw a one-dollar bill on the
floor near her left foot and another on the counter. Dr.
Stephen Tracey, who performed the autopsy,
testified that Mary had numerous lacerations on her head and that
her skull was fractured in several places. Additionally, her nose
was broken and her left eye had been displaced by a fracture to the
bone behind it. Mary's brain had hemorrhaged, was bruised and
lacerated in several places, and contained skull fragments. Tracey
determined that blunt trauma to the head caused Mary's death and
that she died from the trauma before she lost a fatal amount of
blood. He also concluded that human hands had not inflicted the
wounds; he surmised from their size and shape that the perpetrator
used a lug-nut wrench, a tire wrench, or possibly a pipe.
Mark Stewart, an employee of The Pantry,
testified that he worked on October 27 and November 1, 1991. On
October 27 Stewart saw a tire tool behind the counter to the side of
the cash register. The tool had lain there for approximately one
year. It was curved on one end with a round hole for a lug nut and
was split on the other end for hubcap removal.
Stewart noticed that the tool was missing when he
worked on November 1, the day after the murder. Thomas Tucker, a
district manager of The Pantry, testified that he arrived at The
Pantry sometime after 6:00 a.m. on October 31 . He examined the cash
register tape for that morning; it showed, among other transactions,
a gasoline sale of five dollars at 3:29 a.m. and a no-sale at 3:35
a.m. The cash register enters a no-sale when it is opened but no
purchase is made.
According to the tape, no transaction occurred
between the five-dollar purchase and the no-sale. Tucker opened the
register at 6:22 a.m. at the direction of Captain Ledbetter to
determine whether any money had been taken during the homicide. He
concluded that approximately forty-eight dollars were missing.
On November 16, 1991 Lieutenant Mark Cherka and
Officer David Lail drove to Anthony's Trailer Park to find Powell
and bring him to the police station for questioning. Powell came out
of a trailer and allowed Cherka to take four photographs of him.
Powell agreed to accompany Cherka and Lail to the police station for
questioning as a possible suspect in the murder. Powell was not
under arrest at that time; the officers told him he did not have to
leave with them.
They arrived at the police station at
approximately 4:00 p.m., and Cherka began to question Powell. Powell
refused to allow Cherka to tape record the interview, so Cherka made
notes of what transpired shortly after the interview ended. Powell
stated that he had gone to sleep at around 4:00 a.m. on 31 October
after drinking with Don Weathers and Powell's girlfriend, Lori
Yelton. Later that morning Yelton and Powell took Weathers to the
hospital because he had cut himself at some point during the
previous night.
Cherka left the interview room and related
Powell's statement to Ledbetter. While Cherka had been questioning
Powell, Truelove had identified Powell from a lineup containing
thirty-two photographs as the man he saw in The Pantry on 31 October.
Ledbetter informed Cherka of the identification and then accompanied
Cherka back into the interview room. Powell again indicated he did
not want to be tape recorded, and Ledbetter complied.
Ledbetter told
Powell about Truelove's identification and asked Powell if he wanted
an attorney. Powell stated that he had not killed anyone and did not
want an attorney. Ledbetter advised Powell of his Miranda rights,
and Powell signed a waiver of those rights. Powell continued to deny
involvement in the murder. Ledbetter then told him he knew he had
killed the woman and asked, "Why did you kill her?"
Powell hung his
head and answered, "[S]he slapped me and I went off on her." Powell
then asked to speak to Ledbetter alone; Cherka left the room.
Ledbetter again asked Powell why he had killed Mary. Powell stated
that she had slapped him, he had panicked, he had not intended to
harm her, and he merely wanted the money from the cash register.
Powell then indicated that he wanted to speak to Ledbetter off the
record and asked Ledbetter to tear up the Miranda waiver form, which
Ledbetter did. Powell related additional details about the crime,
including information about the weapon he had used, after Ledbetter
ripped the form into four pieces.
At about 6:00 p.m. Powell asked for a lawyer, and
one was contacted for him. Powell was arrested and taken into
custody after he conferred with his lawyer. Powell testified that he
did not read the Miranda waiver form, but signed it because he felt
"agreeable" from cocaine he had ingested.
He further testified that
Ledbetter suggested they talk off the record. On cross-examination
he admitted he had given Miranda warnings during his tenure in law
enforcement; he recited the warnings on the witness stand. He also
admitted he had not mentioned in his pretrial affidavit that
Ledbetter proposed that they talk off the record.
Billy Joe Sparks testified that sometime after
the murder he had a conversation with Paul Barnard, who called
himself Rambo. During the conversation Rambo sniffed glue and both
men drank beer. Rambo told Sparks he had killed a woman at a
supermarket by beating her to death. Rambo died before Powell's
trial; Sparks did not tell the police about Rambo's statement until
after Rambo's death.
Johnny Smith, the operator of a local
entertainment center, testified that he had spoken to Truelove about
the murder. Smith stated that Truelove told him he had seen a man
with red hair in The Pantry on the day of the murder. In rebuttal
the State recalled Truelove. He testified that he knew Rambo and
that the lineup from which he identified Powell contained a
photograph of Rambo. Truelove never picked Rambo as the person he
saw at The Pantry on 31 October. Truelove also testified that he
remembered having a conversation with Smith about becoming an uncle,
not about the murder. Truelove and his sister both have red hair,
and his sister had recently given birth to a baby with red hair.
The State also called Officer James Glover of the
Shelby Police Department in rebuttal. Glover testified that Rambo
claimed to be a Vietnam veteran and to have a black belt in karate;
neither claim was true. Before his death Rambo had telephoned Glover
and told him he had lied to Sparks about committing the murder.
Rambo told Sparks he had killed a woman only to maintain his street
image.
At sentencing the State relied on the evidence it presented
at the guilt/innocence phase. Powell's evidence showed that Powell
was raised in a loving family, had worked as a jailer and with the
fire department, and was well-liked and not violent.
Dr. Terrence Onischenko, an expert in psychology
and neuropsychology, testified that he performed comprehensive
testing of Powell on 22 November 1992. The results showed that
Powell's memory, problem-solving skills, and motor functions are
impaired. Powell scored in the average range on other tests. Dr.
Onischenko also testified that Powell has an increased chance of
developing Alzheimer's disease as well as other organic diseases.
Powell's abuse of cocaine and alcohol probably caused his brain
dysfunctions.
Powell has an average IQ and normal concentration
skills, language functions, sensory ability, and visual ability.
Powell also presented evidence showing that he took good care of his
son, who is profoundly mentally retarded and autistic. Powell
implemented the programs devised for his son's development and
served on the advisory council of the parent-teacher organization at
his son's school.
Two jailers at the Cleveland County jail
testified that Powell had adjusted well to life as an inmate and had
caused no problems. The jury found Powell guilty of first-degree
murder under the felony murder rule, with robbery with a dangerous
weapon as the underlying felony. At sentencing the jury found one
aggravating circumstance, that the murder was committed for
pecuniary gain, and no mitigating circumstances. It unanimously
recommended that Powell be sentenced to death; the trial court
sentenced Powell accordingly.
National Coalition to Abolish
the Death Penalty
William Powell - North Carolina - March 11, 2005
The state of North Carolina is scheduled to
execute William Dillard Powell on March 11, 2005 for the 1991 murder
of Mary Gladden in Cleveland County.
While under the influence of cocaine, Powell
entered a convenience store with the intent of robbing the store. He
was unarmed when he entered the store and maintains he did not plan
to harm anyone. When Gladden attempted to impede the robbery Powell
picked up a heavy tool from behind the counter and used it to beat
her to death.
Powell’s life had been taken over by his
addictions to cocaine and alcohol, leaving him unable to hold a
steady job to support himself. It also caused him to suffer from
brain dysfunctions that impaired his memory, problem-solving skills,
and motor skills. His condition worsened when he was under the
influence of cocaine or alcohol, as he was when the murder of
Gladden occurred.
Before becoming addicted to cocaine, he was the
sole caretaker for his son who was profoundly retarded and autistic.
He was very involved in his son’s care and development and even
served on the advisory council for the Parent Teacher Organization
at his son’s school. Powell also served in the U.S. Army, was a
member of the Shelby Fire Department, and volunteered with the
rescue squad.
Powell’s defense argued that his trial was unfair
for several reasons. The defense was not entitled to individual voir
dire during jury selection. Voir dire allows either attorney to
challenge a perspective juror if he or she says or expresses a bias
against the attorney’s case. The judge determined this was justified
because he wanted to avoid the alleged domino effect of group voir
dire, whereby one juror learns which answers will help him/her avoid
jury duty.
However, the defense maintained they should have
been allowed the privilege of voir dire. The jurors were not given
peremptory instructions on mitigating circumstances in the penalty
phase of the trial, which the defense feels should have occurred.
The defense also argues that the confession Powell made after his
Miranda waiver was destroyed should not have been admissible. The
defense was also prohibited from alerting the jurors of some
important statutory mitigating circumstances. For instance, the
defense could not tell the jurors that Powell had no significant
history of prior criminal activity.
The defense was not allowed to tell jurors that
he had been a model prisoner while incarcerated. Lastly, the defense
contends the prosecution belittled the sentencing process when they
informed the jurors to focus on the crime instead of the mitigating
evidence.
Please take a moment to urge Governor Easley to
stop the execution of William Dillard Powell!
Convenience-store clerk killer executed by
injection
Winston-Salem Journal
Friday, March 11, 2005
RALEIGH, N.C. - The killer of a convenience-store
clerk was executed by injection early Friday despite arguments from
death penalty opponents that his crime would receive a less severe
punishment in 40 other states.
William Dillard Powell, 58, was sentenced to
death in 1993 for killing Mary Gladden as he tried to rob her for
drug money. Powell was high on cocaine and beat the 54-year-old
Gladden to death with a tire iron he found in the Cleveland County
store because she fought back, his lawyers said.
Powell was
pronounced dead at 2:09 a.m., said correction system spokeswoman Pam
Walker. He declined to make a final statement and in the minutes
before the lethal drugs were injected, Powell told his sister that
he loved her. Execution witnesses were separated from Powell by a
thick glass window.
The execution came after the U.S. Supreme Court
declined late Thursday to review the case. Gov. Mike Easley denied
clemency. "Having carefully reviewed the clemency petition, I
conclude that there are no compelling reasons to invalidate the
sentence recommended by the jury and affirmed by the courts," Easley
said in a release.
Ken Rose, director of the Center for Death
Penalty Litigation in Durham, which is assisting Powell's attorneys,
said Powell does not deserve to be executed because he did not
premeditate his killing and the only legally aggravating factor is
attempted robbery. Forty other states would not allow an execution
in such a case, Rose argued.
The state Supreme Court rejected a defense
argument Wednesday that the courts had not adequately considered a
recently lodged complaint claim of prosecutorial misconduct during
Powell's trial. Attorneys said Cleveland County District Attorney
Bill Young, who prosecuted the case, failed to reveal a deal with
Powell's girlfriend, Lori Yelton Donohue, in exchange for her
testimony at the 1993 trial. Prosecutors are required to tell the
defense about any promises made to witnesses.
Powell was moved Wednesday to the death watch
area at Central Prison in Raleigh, a spokeswoman for the state
Department of Correction said. At mid-afternoon Thursday he had met
with his lawyers, spokeswoman Pam Walker said. Powell's sister also
was scheduled to visit.
At 5:30 p.m., he had his last meal: A medium,
thin-crust pizza with pepperoni, mushrooms and Canadian bacon; a
hamburger with mustard, chili and onions and a 20-ounce Pepsi.
Powell was the first person executed in North Carolina this year and
the 35th since capital punishment was reinstated in 1977. No other
executions are currently scheduled.
Death row in North Carolina is home to 178 men
and four women. That includes four defendants who committed their
crimes as 17-year-olds whose death sentences were thrown out last
week by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Execution unfair for unintentional murder
Powell's case shows that sometimes the system simply doesn't work
By David Teddy - Charlotte Observer
Wed, Mar. 09, 2005
(RALEIGH) - David Teddy has practiced law in
Shelby since 1988. He was recently appointed to represent William
Powell as a result of the death of Powell's former attorney, Tony
Lynch, who died of a brain tumor.
I want to express my sincere sympathy to Mary
Gladden's family. Her tragic death should never have occurred. My
remarks are in no way intended to minimize the pain and sorrow her
family has been forced to endure by the loss of their loved one. My
plea, instead, involves our state's responsibility to dispense
punishment fairly and evenhandedly -- a responsibility even more
demanding when the punishment is the ultimate, irreversible sentence
of death.
This Friday at 2 a.m. our state is scheduled to
execute William Dillard Powell Jr. If the execution proceeds, our
state will have the unfortunate distinction of executing a man with
no history of violence other than the unintentional killing for
which he was sentenced to death. Gov. Mike Easley has the power to
stop this execution by granting clemency, a decision that would be
entirely consistent with the two other occasions when he decided to
spare individuals from a death by lethal injection.
Powell was sent to death row despite the fact
that a seasoned and experienced trial judge ruled that he had no
intention of killing Mary Gladden during a convenience store robbery.
Only a minority of states even permit the execution of persons who
do not intend to kill, and very few states actually execute persons
convicted of unintentional murders. That he did not intend to kill
is not the only reason a death sentence for Powell is excessive.
While every murder is horrific, there have been far worse murders in
Cleveland County -- premeditated killings committed by persons with
violent histories -- that did not result in a death penalty. In fact,
press reports indicate the last execution from Cleveland County
occurred in 1935.
Justice requires that similar persons committing
similar crimes receive similar punishments. That is not so in this
case. Powell is the only person on death row in North Carolina for
unintentional murder. Why haven't these issues been addressed by the
court system? The answer is that in this case the courts have
failed.
All death penalty cases in our state are
subjected to a proportionality review by the N.C. Supreme Court. A
comprehensive study of the court's proportionality review process
found that Powell's case represents the single most egregious
failing of that review. This study was undertaken by a law professor
who was attempting to help another inmate, not Powell, but the
professor identified Powell's case as the one that stood out among
all others as a chilling example of how the criminal justice system
can fail in a case involving the ultimate punishment of death.
Should North Carolina execute a man whose
punishment is so grossly disproportionate to other cases? Central to
the U.S. Supreme Court's application of the death penalty is the
notion it should be reserved for the worst offenders who commit the
worst crimes. Justice Anthony Kennedy, in last week's decision on
juveniles, echoed that sentiment when he wrote, "Capital punishment
must be limited to those offenders who commit `a narrow category of
the most serious crimes' and whose extreme culpability makes them
`the most deserving of execution.' "
Powell, a former volunteer firefighter and Army
veteran who had no history of violent acts and was the loving,
devoted father of a severely autistic and mentally retarded boy,
surely does not fit that description. His life spiraled out of
control when he became addicted to alcohol and began using crack
cocaine.
On the night of the crime back in 1991, in a desperate act
to obtain money to buy drugs, he entered a Shelby convenience store.
He was unarmed. During the robbery he panicked. Prosecutors said he
killed the clerk, Mary Gladden, with a heavy tool he found in the
store. The trial court judge found that there was no premeditation
in the fatal act.
There's no question he should be severely
punished for her unintended death. But should he be executed? Is
Powell really the "worst of the worst"?
Sometimes defendants get caught up in a criminal
justice system that does not always treat people equally. Sometimes,
on second glance, the punishment handed out by a jury or judge just
doesn't look right. Sometimes a defendant simply needs a safety net
to ensure that his case does not slip through the cracks, especially
when the penalty is death. Powell's case is a powerful demonstration
for the governor and legislators that sometimes the system simply
doesn't work. This is precisely the reason the governor was given
the power to grant clemency.
As his execution draws near, William Powell is
standing at the door of death, anxiously awaiting word from the
governor. It is my sincere hope and earnest prayer that Gov. Easley
will close the door on this terrible tragedy by granting clemency --
a decision that will allow Powell the opportunity to die a natural
death in prison, not a death hastened by poison pumped into his
veins.
State executes Shelby woman's killer
By William Holmes - Channel 14-TV
AP - March 11, 2005
RALEIGH, N.C. -- A man convicted of beating a
convenience-store clerk to death with a tire iron was executed early
Friday after the courts rejected arguments that his crime didn't
meet the legal standard for the death penalty.
William Dillard Powell, 58, died by injection at
2:09 a.m., said corrections spokeswoman Pam Walker. He was convicted
in 1993 of killing Mary Gladden, 54, after he tried to steal money
to buy drugs. He was high on cocaine at the time of the robbery
attempt.
Powell declined to make a final statement. He
told his sister, Lavonda Camp, through the double-paned glass in the
death chamber that he loved her minutes before his execution started
at 2 a.m. He turned quickly toward the back of the room and spoke
with his executioners as they began to administer the lethal
injection. He then began to count down from 99. His lips stopped
moving about the time he reached 95.
Gladden's sons, Keith Carroll
and Ricky Carroll, watched without any apparent emotion. Camp sobbed
as one of her brother's attorneys, Marilyn Ozer, hugged her around
her shoulders. Ozer drew her closer as the prison warden pronounced
Powell's death.
Powell should not have been executed because the
killing was not premeditated and because the only aggravating factor
was attempted robbery, the same charge used to bolster the murder
count to felony murder and make Powell eligible for execution, Ken
Rose of the Center for Death Penalty Litigation in Durham argued.
Forty other states would not allow an execution in such a case, Rose
said.
The Supreme Court declined late Thursday to
review Powell's case and Gov. Mike Easley denied his request for
clemency later in the evening. The state Supreme Court rejected a
defense argument Wednesday that the courts had not adequately
considered a recent claim of prosecutorial misconduct during
Powell's trial.
Powell's lawyers said Cleveland County District
Attorney Bill Young failed to reveal a deal with Powell's
girlfriend, Lori Yelton Donohue, in exchange for her testimony
against their client. Prosecutors are required to tell the defense
about any promises made to witnesses.
Powell was moved Wednesday to the death watch
area at Central Prison in Raleigh. He spent most of his last day
with his lawyers, Ozer, James Glover and William Massengale. His
sister visited him about 10 p.m. and spent about an hour with him,
state Department of Correction spokeswoman Pam Walker said. Powell's
sister also was scheduled to visit. At 5:30 p.m., he had his last
meal: A medium, thin-crust pizza with pepperoni, mushrooms and
Canadian bacon; a hamburger with mustard, chili and onions and a 20-ounce
Pepsi.
Powell was the first person executed in North
Carolina this year and the 35th since capital punishment was
reinstated in 1977. No other executions are currently scheduled.
Death row in North Carolina is home to 178 men and four women. That
includes four defendants who committed their crimes as 17-year-olds
whose death sentences were thrown out last week by the U.S. Supreme
Court.
People of Faith Against the
Death Penalty
William Dillard Powell is scheduled to be
executed by North Carolina March 11, 2005.
He was sentenced to death in 1993 for the murder
of Mary Gladden in Cleveland County. She died during William
Powell's attempt to rob the convenience store where she worked.
William never intended to kill, or even hurt,
anyone. In fact, he was unarmed when he entered the store. The trial
judge specifically found that there was no evidence of premeditation,
and that the killing was not the result of premeditation on
William's part.
William Powell was a loving and caring father.
When his ex-wife gave up custody of their autistic and mentally
retarded son Bobby in 1988, he assumed custody, becoming very
involved and dedicated to Bobby's care and development. He served on
the advisory council for the Parent Teacher Organization at North
Shelby School, Cleveland County's school for students with physical
or mental disabilities.
Professionals who worked with Bobby described
William's relationship with his son as "very, very close and very,
very intense and tight ... and that [Bobby] really derive[ed]
benefit from his daddy's involvement with him."
William's life was devastated by alcohol and drug
abuse. The addictions took over and destroyed his life, leaving him
incapable of gainful and productive employment. On Oct. 31, 1991,
high on cocaine and Xanax, William robbed a convenience store for
crack money for his girlfriend. A heavy tool kept behind the counter
became the murder weapon. A neuropsychologist found that William
suffered from longstanding brain dysfunctions which impaired his
judgment, reasoning and logic. The impairments worsened when he was
under the influence of drugs and alcohol, as he was the night of the
crime.
Before Powell's life deteriorated, he served our
country with honor as a sergeant in the U.S. Army. He served his
community as a member of the Shelby Fire Department, volunteer with
the rescue squad, and in other roles. Prior to receiving the death
penalty, William had no history of violence. Since being on death
row, he has had an exemplary disciplinary record.
Mr. Powell's case is not one of the "worst of the
worst." To execute William Powell would violate the important
principle that the death penalty is reserved for those whose
offenses are the most blameworthy.
The information above was provided by William
Powell's legal defense team.
Take Action!
URGE YOUR CONGREGATION AND YOUR MINISTER TO GET
INVOLVED. Meet with your congregation's pastor, rabbi or leader. Ask
him or her to preach against this execution and against the death
penalty, even if you are sure he or she would not want to do so.
Write an article for the bulletin and announce
the protests against the death penalty. Announce the actions (listed
below) people can take. Ask your minister or rabbi to write a letter
to Gov. Easley.
Lawyers make appeal for Cleveland County man
scheduled for execution
By Barry Smith - Shelby
Star
NCmoratorium.org
March 3, 2005
RALEIGH — Saying the murder William Dillard
Powell Jr. committed doesn’t deserve the death penalty, lawyers for
and supporters of the condemned killer asked Gov. Mike Easley on
Wednesday to grant their client clemency.
Calling the case “aberrant,” Columbia University
sociologist Peter Bearman said that other people committing crimes
similar to what Powell committed didn’t get the death penalty. “It’s
chillingly clear,” Bearman said. “The cases most similar to it are
cases that juries returned a sentence of life.” Bearman made the
statements at a press conference Wednesday afternoon following the
clemency hearings at the state Capitol earlier in the day.
“The death penalty in this rare and unique case
does not represent equal justice under the law,” said Shelby lawyer
David Teddy, helping the defense team.
Powell is scheduled to die by lethal injection at
2 a.m. March 11 in the state’s death chamber at Central Prison for
the Oct. 31, 1991, beating death of convenience store clerk Mary
Gladden.
Defense attorney Bill Massengale said Powell was
tried for first-degree murder under the felony murder law. That law
allows a defendant to be tried for first-degree murder even if there
is no premeditation if the murder occurred during the commission of
a felony. In the Powell case, the felony involved was the robbery at
the Pantry at Charles and Dellinger roads in Shelby. The sole
aggravating factor was pecuniary gain — or money, he said
Cleveland County District Attorney Bill Young
attended the clemency hearing but refused to comment afterward. Two
retired Shelby police detectives — Dale Ledbetter and Preston Cherka
— also attended the hearing. “In my 27 years with the city of Shelby,
it’s the most heinous crime I’ve investigated,” Ledbetter said.
Cherka said that Powell killed Ms. Gladden with a tire tool. “He
went in to rob to get money for a girl he was seeing to get drugs,”
Cherka said.
Some members of Ms. Gladden’s family were also at
the Capitol Wednesday. However, they did not meet with Easley. They
also declined comment.
Supporters of Powell painted a picture of a good
person before he encountered substance abuse problems. They said
Powell enlisted in the Army at 17 and had also worked as an
emergency medical technician and a firefighter. “Before he got
touched with cocaine, he was really a fine person,” Massengale said.
Sharon Gensch, who taught Powell’s autistic son Bobby, said Powell
did a lot to help his son. “I knew Mr. Powell to be a very loving
and very devoted father to Bobby,” she said. “He helped us with the
Special Olympics.” She said she feared that if Powell is executed,
the news of the execution could cause Bobby, now 21, to regress.
Defense lawyers also cast doubt over a recording
of a phone call between Powell and the woman he was seeing at the
time of the murder, Lori Yelton. Teddy said that Ms. Yelton’s
credibility could have been challenged if attorneys had known that
she was in line to receive help for her role in taping the call. He
said that a firearm larceny charge was dismissed within a few months
of Powell’s murder trial.
Teddy said he was impressed with the exchange
defense attorneys had with Easley during the clemency procedure. “He
was very engaged with us,” he said.
Easley has made no ruling on whether he will
grant clemency to Powell. Typically, Easley rules on such requests
on the day before an execution is scheduled to take place.
State v. Powell,
459 S.E.2d 219 (N.C. 1995) (Direct Appeal).
Defendant was convicted in the Superior Court,
Cleveland County, Robert E. Gaines, J., of first-degree felony
murder and was sentenced to death. Defendant appealed. The Supreme
Court, Whichard, J., held that: (1) any error in admitting
statements made by defendant after Miranda waiver form was destroyed
was harmless; (2) conversations of defendant taped by third parties
were admissible; (3) rulings on voir dire of jurors were proper; (4)
testimony of witnesses as to defendant's motive was admissible; (5)
error in not allowing defendant's character evidence was harmless;
(6) defendant was not entitled to mistrial after outburst of
spectators when verdict was read; (7) instructions were correct; (8)
prosecutors statements were not grossly improper; (9) prospective
jurors were properly dismissed for cause; and (10) imposition of
death sentence was not disproportionate. Affirmed.
WHICHARD, Justice.
Defendant was convicted of the first-degree murder of Mary Gladden,
an employee of The Pantry on Charles Road in Shelby, and sentenced
to death. He appeals from his conviction and sentence. We conclude
that defendant received a fair trial, free of prejudicial error, and
that the sentence of death is not disproportionate.
The State's evidence tended to show that the
victim was killed on 31 October 1991 while on duty at The Pantry.
Scott Truelove testified that he bought five dollars' worth of
gasoline there between 3:15 and 3:30 a.m. on 31 October. At the
counter he stood near a rough-looking man with unkempt, shoulder-length
hair, facial hair, and a tattoo on his left forearm.
The next
morning Truelove read about the murder and gave a description of the
man to Captain Ledbetter of the Shelby Police Department. On 16
November 1991 Truelove identified defendant as the man by picking
him out of a photographic lineup.
On 31 October 1991 Clarissa Epps
stopped at The Pantry to buy gasoline at approximately 4:15 a.m. She
went in to pay for her purchase. After waiting in vain for a clerk
to appear, Epps called out but received no answer. Epps then turned
and saw the victim lying in blood behind the counter. Epps drove
home and called the police.
Officer Mark Lee of the Shelby Police Department
arrived at The Pantry at 4:26 a.m. on 31 October in response to a
radio dispatch. Lee first ensured that all customers had left the
store and then found the victim behind the counter. She was lying on
her back in a pool of blood with her head toward the cash register
and her hands at her sides. Lee noticed injuries to the victim's
left eye and ear as well as other injuries to her head. He also saw
a one-dollar bill on the floor near her left foot and another on the
counter.
Dr. Stephen Tracey, who performed the autopsy,
testified that the victim had numerous lacerations on her head and
that her skull was fractured in several places. Additionally, her
nose was broken and her left eye had been displaced by a fracture to
the bone behind it. The victim's brain had hemorrhaged, was bruised
and lacerated in several places, and contained skull fragments.
Tracey determined that blunt trauma to the head caused the victim's
death and that she died from the trauma before she lost a fatal
amount of blood. He also concluded that human hands had not
inflicted the wounds; he surmised from their size and shape that the
perpetrator used a lug-nut wrench, a tire wrench, or possibly a
pipe.
Mark Stewart, an employee of The Pantry,
testified that he worked on 27 October and 1 November 1991. On 27
October Stewart saw a tire tool behind the counter to the side of
the cash register. The tool had lain there for approximately one
year. It was curved on one end with a round hole for a lug nut and
was split on the other end for hubcap removal. Stewart noticed that
the tool was missing when he worked on 1 November, the day after the
murder.
Thomas Tucker, a district manager of The Pantry,
testified that he arrived at The Pantry sometime after 6:00 a.m. on
31 October. He examined the cash register tape for that morning; it
showed, among other transactions, a gasoline sale of five dollars at
3:29 a.m. and a no-sale at 3:35 a.m. The cash register enters a
no-sale when it is opened but no purchase is made.
According to the
tape, no transaction occurred between the five-dollar purchase and
the no-sale. Tucker opened the register at 6:22 a.m. at the
direction of Captain Ledbetter to determine whether any money had
been taken during the homicide. He concluded that approximately
forty-eight dollars were missing.
On 16 November 1991 Lieutenant Mark Cherka and
Officer David Lail drove to Anthony's Trailer Park to find defendant
and bring him to the police station for questioning. Defendant came
out of a trailer and allowed Cherka to take four photographs of him.
Defendant agreed to accompany Cherka and Lail to the police station
for questioning as a possible suspect in the murder. Defendant was
not under arrest at that time; the officers told him he did not have
to leave with them.
They arrived at the police station at
approximately 4:00 p.m., and Cherka began to question defendant.
Defendant refused to allow Cherka to tape record the interview, so
Cherka made notes of what transpired shortly after the interview
ended. Defendant stated that he had gone to sleep at around 4:00
a.m. on 31 October after drinking with Don Weathers and defendant's
girlfriend, Lori Yelton.
Later that morning Yelton and defendant
took Weathers to the hospital because he had cut himself at some
point during the previous night. Cherka left the interview room and
related defendant's statement to Ledbetter. While Cherka had been
questioning defendant, Truelove had identified defendant from a
lineup containing thirty-two photographs as the man he saw in The
Pantry on 31 October. Ledbetter informed Cherka of the
identification and then accompanied Cherka back into the interview
room.
Defendant again indicated he did not want to be
tape recorded, and Ledbetter complied. Ledbetter told defendant
about Truelove's identification and asked defendant if he wanted an
attorney. Defendant stated that he had not killed anyone and did not
want an attorney. Ledbetter advised defendant of his Miranda rights,
and defendant signed a waiver of those rights. Defendant continued
to deny involvement in the murder.
Ledbetter then told him he knew he had killed the
woman and asked, "Why did you kill her?" Defendant hung his head and
answered, "[S]he slapped me and I went off on her." Defendant then
asked to speak to Ledbetter alone; Cherka left the room. Ledbetter
again asked defendant why he had killed the victim. Defendant stated
that she had slapped him, he had panicked, he had not intended to
harm her, and he merely wanted the money from the cash register.
Defendant then indicated that he wanted to speak
to Ledbetter off the record and asked Ledbetter to tear up the
Miranda waiver form, which Ledbetter did. Defendant related
additional details about the crime, including information about the
weapon he had used, after Ledbetter ripped the form into four
pieces. At about 6:00 p.m. defendant asked for a lawyer, and one was
contacted for him. Defendant was arrested and taken into custody
after he conferred with his lawyer.
Defendant testified that he did not read the
Miranda waiver form, but signed it because he felt "agreeable" from
cocaine he had ingested. He further testified that Ledbetter
suggested they talk off the record. On cross-examination he admitted
he had given Miranda warnings during his tenure in law enforcement;
he recited the warnings on the witness stand. He also admitted he
had not mentioned in his pretrial affidavit that Ledbetter proposed
that they talk off the record.
Billy Joe Sparks testified that sometime after
the murder he had a conversation with Paul Barnard, who called
himself Rambo. During the conversation Rambo sniffed glue and both
men drank beer. Rambo told Sparks he had killed a woman at a
supermarket by beating her to death. Rambo died before defendant's
trial; Sparks did not tell the police about Rambo's statement until
after Rambo's death.
Johnny Smith, the operator of a local
entertainment center, testified that he had spoken to Truelove about
the murder. Smith stated that Truelove told him he had seen a man
with red hair in The Pantry on the day of the murder.
In rebuttal the State recalled Truelove. He
testified that he knew Rambo and that the lineup from which he
identified defendant contained a photograph of Rambo. Truelove never
picked Rambo as the person he saw at The Pantry on 31 October.
Truelove also testified that he remembered having a conversation
with Smith about becoming an uncle, not about the murder. Truelove
and his sister both have red hair, and his sister had recently given
birth to a baby with red hair.
The State also called Officer James
Glover of the Shelby Police Department in rebuttal. Glover testified
that Rambo claimed to be a Vietnam veteran and to have a black belt
in karate; neither claim was true. Before his death Rambo had
telephoned Glover and told him he had lied to Sparks about
committing the murder. Rambo told Sparks he had killed a woman only
to maintain his street image.
At sentencing the State relied on the evidence it
presented at the guilt/innocence phase. Defendant's evidence showed
that defendant was raised in a loving family, had worked as a jailer
and with the fire department, and was well-liked and not violent.
Dr. Terrence Onischenko, an expert in psychology and neuropsychology,
testified that he performed comprehensive testing of defendant on 22
November 1992.
The results showed that defendant's memory, problem-solving
skills, and motor functions are impaired. Defendant scored in the
average range on other tests. Dr. Onischenko also testified that
defendant has an increased chance of developing Alzheimer's disease
as well as other organic diseases. Defendant's abuse of cocaine and
alcohol probably caused his brain dysfunctions. Defendant has an
average IQ and normal concentration skills, language functions,
sensory ability, and visual ability.
Defendant also presented evidence showing that he
took good care of his son, who is profoundly mentally retarded and
autistic. Defendant implemented the programs devised for his son's
development and served on the advisory council of the parent-teacher
organization at his son's school. Two jailers at the Cleveland
County jail testified that defendant had adjusted well to life as an
inmate and had caused no problems.
The jury found defendant guilty of first-degree
murder under the felony murder rule, with robbery with a dangerous
weapon as the underlying felony. At sentencing the jury found one
aggravating circumstance, that the murder was committed for
pecuniary gain, and no mitigating circumstances. It unanimously
recommended that *686 defendant be sentenced to death; the trial
court sentenced defendant accordingly.
* * *
We thus cannot conclude that the death sentence
was aberrant, capricious, or disproportionate. NO ERROR.
Powell v. Lee,
282 F.Supp.2d 355 (4th Cir. 2003). (Habeas)
Following affirmance of his first-degree murder
conviction and death sentence on direct appeal, 340 N.C. 674, 459
S.E.2d 219, and denial of state post-conviction relief, petitioner
sought writ of habeas corpus. The District Court, Thornburg, J.,
held that: (1) counsel did not render deficient performance during
capital murder sentencing hearing; (2) petitioner was not entitled
to peremptory instruction on certain mitigating factors, and thus
counsel was not deficient in failing to request instruction; (3)
death sentence based on aggravating factor that murder was committed
for pecuniary gain did not violate Eighth Amendment; (4) state's
pretrial disclosures satisfied Brady rights; and (5) any error in
admitting statements allegedly made "off the record" was harmless
beyond reasonable doubt. Petition denied.
THORNBURG, District Judge.
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Petitioner's petition for a
writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Respondents have
filed both a motion for summary judgment and a response to the
petition. The parties have submitted portions of the record for
review as well as legal briefs. The undersigned concludes the record
is adequate and finds an evidentiary hearing is unnecessary. Rule
8(a), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States
District Courts. For the reasons stated herein, the petition is
denied.
I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On April 29, 1993, the sentence of death was
imposed on the Petitioner by the same jury that two days earlier had
found him guilty of first degree murder under the felony murder
rule. On direct appeal, the North Carolina Supreme Court concluded
"that defendant received a fair trial, free of prejudicial error,
and that the sentence of death is not disproportionate." State v.
Powell, 340 N.C. 674, 682, 459 S.E.2d 219, 222 (1995). Petitioner's
petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court
was denied in January 1996. Powell v. North Carolina, 516 U.S. 1060,
116 S.Ct. 739, 133 L.Ed.2d 688 (1996).
On April 22, 1997, the Petitioner filed a motion
for appropriate relief (MAR). During that proceeding, litigation
occurred concerning discovery from the State and the scope thereof.
In June 1997, the Petitioner's motion for discovery was denied and
an order was entered summarily denying the MAR. On September 30,
1997, the North Carolina Supreme Court temporarily stayed the
Petitioner's execution date and the dismissal of his MAR.
On July
29, 1998, the state Supreme Court granted the petition for writs of
certiorari and supersedeas for the limited purpose of remanding the
case for reconsideration of the MAR. State v. Powell, 348 N.C. 697,
511 S.E.2d 654 (1998). The State's response to this remand was a
request for a ruling without an evidentiary hearing and summary
dismissal.
On October 15, 1998, that motion was granted and the
Petitioner moved to vacate the dismissal. On July 1, 1999, the state
court vacated the October 1998 order of dismissal and found the
Petitioner was entitled to an evidentiary hearing. The State's
petition to the North Carolina Supreme Court for a writ of
certiorari was denied in October 1999. State v. Powell, 540 S.E.2d
745 (N.C.1999).
Discovery hearings were conducted in February,
March and April of 2000. On March 27, 2000, the Petitioner amended
his MAR and an evidentiary hearing was conducted in June 2000. On
June 27, 2001, both the MAR and amended MAR were denied.
Petitioner's petition for a writ of certiorari was denied by the
State Supreme Court on December 19, 2002. State v. Powell, 356 N.C.
621, 575 S.E.2d 520 (2002). This action was filed three days later.
II. STATEMENT OF FACTS AT TRIAL
Mary Gladden was the evening shift clerk at The
Pantry on Charles Road, Shelby, North Carolina, on October 31, 1991.
Powell, 340 N.C. at 682, 459 S.E.2d at 222. Scott Truelove (Truelove)
purchased gasoline from the store around 3:15 a.m. that morning. Id.
While paying at the counter, he stood near "a rough-looking man with
unkempt, shoulder-length hair, facial hair, and a tattoo on his left
forearm." Id. That same morning, Clarissa Epps stopped to buy
gasoline from the store around 4:15 a.m. Id. After waiting to pay
inside the store, she called out but no one answered. Id. Epps then
saw the victim lying behind the counter. Id. Epps drove home and
called the police. Id.
The investigating officer found the victim lying
on her back "in a pool of blood" with injuries to head and left eye
and ear. Id. An autopsy revealed that her skull had been fractured
in several places, her nose was broken, and her left eye had been
displaced by a fracture to the bone behind it. Id. Death had been
caused by blunt trauma and she died from that trauma before she lost
a fatal amount of blood. Id.
On November 16, 1991, the Petitioner voluntarily
accompanied officers to the police station for questioning despite
being told he was not under arrest and did not have to go with them.
Id., at 683, 459 S.E.2d at 223. The Petitioner signed a Miranda
[FN1] waiver during the interview. When the interviewing officer
asked, "Why did you kill her?," the "Defendant hung his head and
answered, '[S]he slapped me and I went off on her.' " Id., at 684,
459 S.E.2d at 223. Petitioner also stated that he had not intended
to hurt her; he had only come in to rob the store. Id.
Don Weathers (Weathers) testified that on the
evening before the victim was murdered, he, the Petitioner and the
Petitioner's girlfriend, Lori Yelton (Yelton), were at his apartment
and had been drinking "quite a bit." Respondents' Exhibit B4, at
1328. Sometime after midnight, he was cut with a knife so badly that
he had to have stitches. Id.
Yelton testified that she began living with the
Petitioner in April 1991. Id., at 1395. At that time, and throughout
the time she lived with the Petitioner, Yelton used a gram of
cocaine each day. Id., at 1397. However, neither she nor the
Petitioner worked during this time and the Petitioner's only source
of income was disability income received on behalf of his son. Id.,
at 1402. This income stopped in August 1991 when the child began
living with his mother. Id.
In September and October 1991, the
electricity in Petitioner's apartment was disconnected due to
nonpayment and Yelton and the Petitioner would often stay at
Weathers' apartment. Id., at 1403. During this time period, Yelton
and the Petitioner used cocaine together every day. Id., at 1405. On
the evening of October 30, 1991, she and the Petitioner used cocaine
all day until about 9:00 or 10:00 p.m. when they exhausted their
supply, Id., at 1407.
During the sentencing phase of the trial, defense
counsel presented the testimony of Dr. Terrence Onischenko, an
expert in psychology and neuropsychology, who opined that the
Petitioner's abuse of cocaine and alcohol had caused organic brain
dysfunction. Powell, 340 N.C. at 685, 459 S.E.2d at 224;
Respondents' Exhibit B5, at 1773, 1776.
Dr. Onischenko also
testified that Petitioner's history of cocaine and alcohol abuse
could "impair judgment, reasoning and logic[.]" Id., at 1776. "He
has a brain dysfunction and in combination with any kind o[f]
alcohol or substance abuse, the tendency is for these people to be
more confused, impaired and dysfunctional." Id., at 1777.
He testified that the Petitioner was within the normal range on some of
the tests that evaluated elements of judgment and reasoning;
however, in other areas of neuropsychological skills, he was grossly
impaired. Id., at 1786. When asked how long the Petitioner had
experienced this condition, the doctor responded that although it
was "hard to say," it was something which had chronically developed;
"it's not something that happened overnight or recently." Id., at
1787.
Evidence was also presented that the Petitioner had been a
good care-giver to his profoundly retarded and autistic son. Powell,
340 N.C. at 685, 459 S.E.2d at 224 .Despite this evidence, the jury
found no mitigating factors and concluded the murder had been
committed for pecuniary gain. Id.
A witness named Billy Joe Sparks testified "that
sometime after the murder he had a conversation with Paul Barnard,
who called himself Rambo." Id., at 684, 459 S.E.2d at 223. While the
two men drank, Rambo "told Sparks he had killed a woman at a
supermarket by beating her to death." Id. Rambo died before the
Petitioner's trial. Id. Officer James Glover of the Shelby Police
Department testified on rebuttal that Rambo was known for
fabricating a story that he was a Vietnam veteran with a black belt
in karate. Id., at 685, 459 S.E.2d at 224.
The officer further
testified that Rambo had called him prior to his death and admitted
that he "had lied to Sparks about committing the murder [in order]
to maintain his street image." Id. Commander Dale Ledbetter (Ledbetter)
of the Shelby Police Department testified during the Petitioner's
trial.
On November 3, 1991, he prepared a photographic line-up at
the police station which was admitted into evidence at trial as
State's Exhibit 2. [FN2] Respondents' Exhibit B4, at 1154. The
photograph placed in position number 3 was of Michael Bailey, a man
who had been corresponding with the deceased victim by mail. Id., at
1155.
The purpose of the photographic array, which *360 was shown to
Truelove, was to eliminate Bailey as a suspect. Id. Truelove saw the
array, which did not contain the Petitioner's photograph, at about
3:00 p.m., on November 3, 1991, and he did not make any
identification. Id., at 1155-56. Because Bailey was in custody in
another state and had not been identified by Truelove, his
photograph in slot number 3 was removed.
FN2. Ledbetter testified that Exhibit 2 appeared
exactly as it had on the date that Truelove saw it except that the
photograph in slot number 3 had been removed after Truelove's
inspection. Id., at 1155.
On November 16, 1991, Ledbetter asked Truelove to
view another photographic array which was introduced at trial as
State's Exhibit 3. Id., at 1156. This array contained 32 photographs,
including that of the Petitioner which was in slot number 14. Id.
The positions of each of the photographs in Exhibit 3 as admitted at
trial were exactly the same as on the day that Truelove saw the
array. Id., at 1157.
Truelove pointed to number 14 and stated that
it was that person who looked the most like the person in The Pantry
on the evening of the murder. Id. Another officer asked if Truelove
was sure and he replied, "I'm 100% sure that's the man that was in
The Pantry that night that I purchased gas." Id., at 1158. Truelove
did state that some of the individuals in the array had similarities
to the person he had seen in the store. Id., at 1166. Weathers was
among the individuals whose photographs were in the array. Id., at
1164.
In addition to the November 3 and 16, 1991, line-ups,
Truelove was shown a third array on November 2, 1991. Id., at 1165,
1250. That array, which was compiled by Officer Larry Linnens,
contained eight photographs including one of the Petitioner which
had been taken in 1977. Id., at 1250-51. When shown the array,
Truelove stated that no one in any of the photographs looked like
the man he had seen in the store. Id., 1253.
During the pretrial proceedings, Petitioner's
defense attorneys were shown the November 16, 1991, line-up at the
police station. Id., at 1182-83. By mistake, the line-up shown to
defense counsel contained both photographs of the Petitioner;
however, the line-up actually identified by Truelove contained only
the photograph taken of the Petitioner on November 16, 1991, at his
trailer park before he accompanied the officers to the police
station. Id., at 1183.
During the trial, Truelove made an in-court
identification of the Petitioner. Id., at 1269. He also reviewed
State's Exhibit 3 and testified that the photograph in slot number
14 was the photograph which he identified on November 16, 1991, as
the Petitioner. Id., at 1274-75. Truelove testified that it did not
take him any time to recognize the Petitioner and he told the
officers that he was "100% sure that was the man I s[aw] in The
Pantry that night." Id., at 1276-77.
Truelove also testified that
the man he saw that night had a tattoo on his left forearm. Id., at
1312-13. The Petitioner had a tattoo on his left forearm. Id., at
1314. Commander Ledbetter also testified during a suppression
hearing held in April 1993 prior to the trial. He spoke to the
Petitioner on November 16, 1991, around 5:00 p.m., after the
Petitioner accompanied other officers to the police station.
Respondents' Exhibit A1, at 90, 92. Before he began speaking with
the Petitioner, Ledbetter had learned that Truelove had identified
the Petitioner from a photographic array. Id., at 95.
Ledbetter told
the Petitioner that he had been identified as being at the store
around the time of the murder and that as a result, he "needed to
advise him of his constitutional rights." Id., at 97. The Petitioner
volunteered that he had not killed anyone. Id. Ledbetter began
reading the Miranda rights to the Petitioner. Id. After reading it
to the Petitioner, Ledbetter slid it toward the Petitioner and he
signed it, although Ledbetter struck out the word "accused" and left
the word "suspect" open. Id., at 99. Lieutenant Cherka witnessed the
signatures. Id., at 100.
At that time, Ledbetter said, "Bugs [FN3],
I know you killed this woman. Why did you do it? That's all I want
to know is why? He dropped his head, mumbled a few words, looked up
at me and sa[id], "I slapped her. She slapped me, and I went off on
her." Id., at 101-02 (footnote added). After making this statement,
the Petitioner said he wanted to go off the record and asked if he
could speak with Ledbetter alone. Id., 102-03.
The Petitioner then
said that "Ms. Gladden slapped him; that he panicked and just wanted
to get out of there and he did not intend to hurt the lady; all he
wanted was the money." Id. Cherka then left. Id., at 102. The
Petitioner then asked Ledbetter to tear up the Miranda warning and
he did so. Id., at 104.
FN3. This was apparently a nickname for the
Petitioner.
Mr. Powell indicated that he had taken Mr.
Weathers' truck and had driven it down to The Pantry for the purpose
of getting money; that he went inside The Pantry. He remembers a
person coming in there; he does not know the person's name nor what
he looks like, but he does remember a person coming in there while
he was there purchasing gas. That he went behind the counter in an
attempt to get the money and the lady fought him over the money. The
he picked up something from behind the counter and began to hit this
lady. [A]ll he wanted to do was get out of there but she kept
holding on with him and he panicked and just went off on her. Id.,
at 104-05.
The Petitioner then told him where he had thrown the
murder weapon on his way back to Weathers' apartment. Id. "Right at
the last is when he said, 'Do you think I need an attorney?' I said,
'I think you do.' " Id., at 106. Ledbetter testified repeatedly that
the Petitioner was sober during the interview, understood the
questions and knew what he was doing.
III. STATEMENT OF FACTS AT THE MAR HEARING
Dr. Onischenko also testified at the hearing on
the Petitioner's motion for appropriate relief (MAR). Respondents'
Exhibit KK1, at 10-80. In his opinion, at the time the capital
felony was committed, the Petitioner had a pattern of
neuropsychological dysfunction caused by alcohol and cocaine abuse.
Id., at 46-47. He also testified that if, in fact, the Petitioner
had been abusing those substances on the day of the crime, he would
be more prone to act impulsively and angrily. Id., at 51-52.
In addition, the Petitioner's ability to appreciate the criminality of
his conduct and to conform his conduct would have been impaired. Id.,
at 55-56. Nonetheless, Dr. Onischenko had told defense counsel
during the trial that he "was not in any position to make a comment
about this individual on that day of a conduct of the alleged
criminal act and what his mental status [was] at that time.
Obviously, it would depend on a lot of factors including how much
alcohol and/or cocaine was consumed, et cetera." Id., at 50.
Dr. Roy Matthew, a psychiatrist with a specialty
in addiction, performed an evaluation of the Petitioner in
connection with the MAR. Id., at 101. At the time of the offense,
the Petitioner had an addiction to multiple drugs and was, in Dr.
Matthew's opinion, on a cocaine binge. Id., at 104. The crime
occurred at the end of a three-day cocaine binge during which the
Petitioner had been taking cocaine intravenously. Id., at 106.
When
a person is on such a binge, he can only focus on obtaining more
cocaine. Id., at 110. Cocaine *362 makes an abuser very irritated,
suspicious, and paranoid. Id., at 111. This situation was worsened
by the fact that the Petitioner was also a Xanax abuser and had
taken two milligrams of Xanax before the crime occurred. Id., at
112. Xanax removes a person's normal inhibitions. Id.
Ali Paksoy, one of the Petitioner's trial
attorneys, testified at the MAR hearing that, although he could not
specifically recall, he may not have asked Dr. Onischenko about
mitigating factors by using the statutory language. Id., at 80,
193-94. It was, however, his recollection that he requested the
submission to the jury of those mitigating factors. Id.
In addition
to his trial testimony, Dr. Onischenko had been retained to testify
at the suppression hearing to show the effects of cocaine abuse and
alcohol abuse on his ability to make an intelligent, understandingly
voluntary statement to police and how it would affect that. We also
wanted to present evidence of his cocaine addiction or cocaine use
and how it affected his mental capacity[,] his capacity to
appreciate what he did and his condition at the time and his mental
or emotional disturbance.
We felt all along and as part of our
strategy that "Bugs"--throughout his life[,] we had no indication
that he had ever been a violent person until he got mixed up with
cocaine and with this Lori Yelton. And we felt he made a very bad,
serious mistake but he wasn't a bad person and we wanted to show, we
wanted to show the cocaine use; we wanted to show his life history
up to the point of having been a police officer and all the good he
had done, especially for his handicapped child.
And this mistake,
although bad, shouldn't lead to his death but to life in prison. And
we wanted to show his cocaine use but we really wanted to avoid
showing that he had voluntarily used cocaine over a nine month
period and show that, I think Dr. Onischenko's testimony was that it
would tend to make him violent. And we kind of wanted to stay away
from that in front of the jury. We didn't really feel how the
voluntary use of cocaine and alcohol over this period would be seen.
We wanted to show how it affected his mental state. But I did[ ]
want to stay away from the violent aspect of it and focus on his
life and all the good he had done. Id., at 196-97.
The Petitioner's second trial counsel, Ralph
Gilbert, also testified at the MAR hearing that, "We were dancing
around the issue of [the Petitioner's] cocaine--his voluntary
cocaine use and the--as we understood it, his propensity, when he
was using cocaine, to be violent."
* * *
Petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus
is hereby DENIED.