Murderpedia has thousands of hours of work behind it. To keep creating
new content, we kindly appreciate any donation you can give to help
the Murderpedia project stay alive. We have many
plans and enthusiasm
to keep expanding and making Murderpedia a better site, but we really
need your help for this. Thank you very much in advance.
Arthur Martin
ROSS
Classification: Murderer
Characteristics:
Robbery
Number of victims: 1
Date of murder:
April 10,
1990
Date of arrest:
4 days after
Date of birth:
May 24,
1954
Victim profile: James Ruble,
26 (real estate agent)
Method of murder:
Shooting (handgun)
Location: Tucson, Arizona, USA
Status:
Executed
by lethal injection in Arizona on April 29,
1998
3 Grilled cheese & fried egg sandwiches, Macaroni & cheese (lots)
Pint of mint chocolate chip ice cream, 2 cans of Pepsi
Arthur Ross, 43, had legal options available but
didn't use them, saying he was tired of living on death row and would
rather die.
He had no final words.
Ross arrived in Tucson in April 1990 and began
plotting his crime immediately, prosecutors say. He posed as a
businessman interested in renting office space to persuade James Ruble,
a 26-year-old real estate agent 4 years out of the University of
Arizona, to take him to the empty office on April 10.
Once inside the building, Ross shot Ruble in the head
with a handgun, dragged him behind a counter and shot him again. He fled
with Ruble's wallet containing a credit card, a bank card and
identification.
Ross withdrew $800 from Ruble's accounts, and used his
victim's ID card to get a driver's license. Ross was arrested in Casa
Grande 4 days later.
Prosecutors called him a career criminal with
convictions in Kansas, Tennessee, Missouri, Kentucky and California.
At the time of the slaying, Ross was on parole for a
1989 2nd-degree burglary conviction in Georgia. He was released from
prison there after serving 8 months of a 20-year sentence.
Arizona executes killer of
real-estate agent
April 29, 1998
PHOENIX (CNN) -- Convicted murderer Arthur Martin
Ross was put to death by lethal injection at 12:03 a.m. (3:03 a.m. EDT)
in the death house at the state prison complex southeast of Phoenix. The
fatal dose killed the 43-year-old three minutes later, officials said.
Witnesses reported that Ross had no last words and
seemed ready to accept his fate.
State officials said Ross could have lived at least
three more years had he not declined to pursue his available appeals. A
state panel decided against clemency Friday.
Ross, called a career criminal by prosecutors, was
sentenced to die in 1991 after killing and robbing a 26-year-old Tucson,
Arizona, real estate agent.
Ross is the 11th person to be executed in Arizona
since the state resumed capital punishment following a 29-year absence.
He is the second person in a week to be put to death.
Last Wednesday, a Honduran national died by lethal
injection after last-minute efforts by that country's president and the
Vatican failed. Jose Roberto Villafuerte, 45, was executed for the 1983
slaying of his girlfriend in a move that sparked anti-American protests
in Honduras.
Arthur Ross
A man convicted of killing a
real estate agent after luring him to a vacant office to rob him was
executed by injection. Arthur Ross, 43, had legal options
available but didn't use them, saying he was tired of living on
death row and would rather die. He had no final words.
Ross arrived in Tucson in April
1990 and began plotting his crime immediately, prosecutors say. He posed
as a businessman interested in renting office space to persuade James
Ruble, a 26-year-old real estate agent 4 years out of the University
of Arizona, to take him to the empty office on April 10.
Once inside the building, Ross
shot Ruble in the head with a handgun, dragged him behind a counter and
shot him again. He fled with Ruble's wallet containing a credit card, a
bank card and identification. Ross withdrew $800 from Ruble's accounts,
and used his victim's ID card to get a driver's license.
Ross was arrested in Casa Grande
4 days later. Prosecutors called him a career criminal with convictions
in Kansas, Tennessee, Missouri, Kentucky and California. At the time of
the slaying, Ross was on parole for a 1989 2nd-degree burglary
conviction in Georgia. He was released from prison there after serving 8
months of a 20-year sentence.
State v.
Ross, 180 Ariz. 598, 886 P.2d 1354 (1994)
PROCEDURAL POSTURE:
Defendant
was convicted in Superior Court (Pima) of premeditated first-degree
murder and armed robbery and sentenced to death for first-degree murder.
This is defendant's automatic direct appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court.
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES:
(F)(5) (Pecuniary Gain) - UPHELD The defendant's admitted objective was to steal money and
identification. It is not relevant whether he intended to kill before
the robbery. A person furthers his pecuniary gain motive when he kills
to facilitate escape and to ensure keeping the stolen items. Here, the
defendant killed to steal credit cards and bankcards. The defendant
lured the victim real estate agent to a vacant store under the pretext
of an interest in leasing the property. Once inside, the defendant
demanded the victim's wallet and during the ensuing struggle, shot the
victim in the head. The defendant dragged the victim's body behind the
counter and again shot him in the head. After stealing the victim's
wallet, the defendant immediately began using the victim's bank and
credit cards. He withdrew money from a bank, obtained a temporary
driver's license, and bought a car with the victim's identification. The
defendant had the victim's wallet in his possession when he was arrested
by the police.
(F)(6) (Heinous, Cruel or Depraved) -
REVERSED
Cruel: Not addressed.
Heinous or Depraved: Reversed.
Senselessness and helplessness alone "will ordinarily not be
sufficient to prove heinousness or depravity." 180 Ariz. at 607. Senselessness: Found. Defendant argued that the victim
fought back during the robbery so he had to shoot him to complete
the robbery. The Court disagreed. Defendant had the victim's wallet
before the second shot was fired, so there was no need to shoot
again. Defendant could have taken victim's wallet without killing
him. Helplessness: Found. The victim was shot twice. He was
rendered helpless by the first shot and hence, the second shot was
delivered when the victim was helpless. 180 Ariz. at 606. Witness Elimination: Not found. The Court articulated three
fact patterns where witness elimination may be found, pursuant to
previously existing case law. First, "where the murder victim is a
witness to some other crime, and is killed to prevent that person
from testifying about the other crime"; second, when "a statement by
the defendant that witness elimination is a motive for the murder"
is made; third, "where extraordinary circumstances of the crime
show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that witness elimination is a
motive. This will only occur in the most extreme cases." 180 Ariz.
at 606. The Court held that the facts of this case did not fit into
any of the three categories.
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES:
The Court found that the following mitigating
circumstances existed, but were insufficiently substantial to call for
leniency:
Lack of Criminal History
Family Ties
The Court found the defendant failed to prove by a
preponderance of the evidence the existence of the following as
mitigating circumstances:
Difficult Childhood/Family History;
Model Prisoner; and Cooperation withpolice
JUDGMENT: Convictions and
death sentence affirmed. The Arizona Supreme Court reversed the (F)(6)
finding and then reweighed the aggravating and mitigating circumstances
before affirming the sentence.
