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.
Mitchell
Carlton SIMS
Robberies
-
December 25, 1985
Domino’s Pizza Slayingsoccurredin South Carolina on Dec. 3, 1985. Mitchell
Carlton Sims and Ruby Padgett were sought in connection with the
murder of two Domino’s Pizza employees during an armed robbery. They
were here for the Glendale murder on Dec. 10 of a deliveryman for that
company, whom they drowned in the bathtub of a motel room they
occupied. (Sims was a disgruntled former employee of Domino’s.)
Apprehended on Christmas day in Las
Vegas, Sims and Padgett were turned over to Los Angeles County
authorities, and a prosecution commenced.
The governor of South Carolina wanted
to have the pair tried in his state, first. An Associated Press story
, datelined Columbia, S.C., says that Gov. Dick Riley “called the
governor of California Tuesday,” Dec. 31, 1985, asking that the
suspects be extradited to his state.
Reiner got in the act. He figured that
extradition would be a good idea since it appeared that a trial there
would take only about six months, while proceedings here might stretch
over two or three years.
The DA wrote to Riley saying, as
quoted in the Jan. 16 issue of the Times:
“I believe that the interests of
justice would be served if these defendants are held accountable in a
manner that is both timely and appropriate. Therefore, although this
action is unprecedented, I am pleased to honor your request….”
A spokesman for Deukmejian is quoted
in the Times article as responding:
“[I]t is crystal clear to us that
governors make decisions regarding extraditions, and not district
attorneys.”
On
Feb. 4, Deukmejian announced he was denying the extradition request
because he did not want the evidence here to get stale. A United Press
International dispatch reports Reiner’s reaction that he was
“dumbfounded” by the governor’s action.
*****
In a syndicated column appearing in numerous California newspapers,
Thomas Elias took Reiner’s part. His March 26 column recites that
Reiner “decided that there was a far greater chance that the two
alleged killers would be executed if convicted in South Carolina than
if they stood trial here first.”
There would have been somewhat of a problem with executing Ruby
Padgett in South Carolina, even if convicted. She wasn’t charged with
a capital crime. She was viewed as an accessory after the fact.
Anyway, the column continues:
“The governor has never liked Reiner, especially since Reiner ousted
Robert Philobosian, a Deukmejian pal and former assistant, from the
Los Angeles District Attorney’s office in the 1984 election. Here was
a chance to put Reiner in his place.
“Deukmejian immediately leaped onto the well-publicized case, noting
first that extradition decisions belong to the governor, not local
prosecutors. Never mind that requests of local prosecutors are almost
always given routine approval.”
Even if such recommendations were routinely adopted by
governors, does it not still appear a bit brash for a DA to merely
presume that his advice would be taken, and to announce to a governor
of another state that “I am pleased to honor your request,” as if the
DA were possessed of final decision-making authority?
Elias’ column quotes Garcetti as saying that Deukmejian’s decision
“greatly impedes our chances of successfully obtaining a death penalty”
verdict in the Los Angeles case because if there were a prior
conviction in South Carolina, it could be used at the penalty phrase.
The
column asserts:
“The upshot is that death penalty advocate Deukmejian has single-handedly
reduced the chances that the Domino suspects will ever be executed,
either here or in South Carolina.
“He
doesn’t admit it, but it’s virtually certain his grudge against Reiner,
who defeated one of his closest allies, was the key reason.”
What Elias is “virtually certain” of strikes me as being long on
supposition and short on facts. While I wouldn’t doubt that Deukmejian
“never liked Reiner” and was disappointed over Philibosian’s 1984 loss,
those factors, alone, hardly justify a conclusion that the governor, a
former attorney general, made his call on a prosecutorial issue based
on spite.
Moreover, despite the implication of Elias’s column—and Reiner’s
express characterization of Deukmejian’s action, quoted in the March 2
edition of the Daily News, as “so petty”—I have not, through the years,
discerned a trace of pettiness on Deukmejian’s part. Have you?
*****
Deukmejian’s action did not
impede the reaching of a death verdict. Sims and Padgett were
convicted in Los Angeles Superior Court, and Sims was sentenced to
death. His accomplice was given a life sentence, without possibility
of parole.
The
California Supreme Court affirmed the death sentence in a 6-1 opinion
on June 28, 1993. The latest news, as reported in the MetNews on Sept.
22, 2005, is that the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals the previous
day denied Sims’ petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
An
Associated Press dispatch from Charleston reports that Sims was
returned to South Carolina on Aug. 12, 1988, to face trial there. The
Aiken (South Carolina) Standard’s issue of May 12, 1989, tells of a
verdict of guilty the previous day on both murder counts, and a count
of armed robbery. The South Carolina Supreme Court affirmed a death
sentence in 1991.