Murderpedia

 

 

Juan Ignacio Blanco  

 

  MALE murderers

index by country

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

  FEMALE murderers

index by country

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

 

 

 
   

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

   

 

 

William Quentin JONES

 
 
 
 
 

 

 

 

 
 
 
Classification: Murderer
Characteristics: Robbery
Number of victims: 1
Date of murder: March 7, 1987
Date of arrest: Same day
Date of birth: August 29, 1968
Victim profile: Edward Peebles (male, 32)
Method of murder: Shooting (Uzi 9 mm pistol)
Location: Wake County, North Carolina, USA
Status: Executed by lethal injection in North Carolina on August 22, 2003
 
 
 
 
 
 

Summary:

Shortly before midnight on 7 March 1987, several employees and customers were in a Raleigh convenience store when Jones, then 18 and wearing a ski mask, entered and fired an Uzi 9 mm pistol three to six times. Two bullets struck Orlando Watson, who, after surgery, survived the wounds he suffered.

Defendant then said "this is a stickup," turned, and twice shot Edward Peebles, 32, who was standing in the corner of the store. The bullets ruptured Peebles' aorta and a large vein, causing massive hemorrhaging and ultimately death. Peebles was a customer who had just stopped in for coffee.

Defendant then directed Charles Taylor, the man behind the counter, to open the cash register. Defendant threatened to kill him. When Taylor was unable to open the register defendant grabbed it and pulled it by the cord out the front door, around the fence, and to the side of the building.

Following his arrest, Jones confessed and ultimately pled guilty to first-degree murder. Following a reversal of his sentence on appeal, a second jury also sentenced him to die.

A tape from a security camera showed that Jones fired six shots from a gun as he entered the convenience store. He fired before announcing that he was robbing the store and discharged a total of 10 bullets.

Citations:

State v. Jones, 396 S.E.2d 309 (N.C. 1990) (Direct Appeal - Sentence Vacated).
State v. Jones, 443 S.E.2d 48 (N.C. 1994) (Direct Appeal).

Final Meal:

Tossed salad with shredded carrots and cheese, thousand island dressing and a soda.

Final Words:

"I'm sorry. I'm gone. I love you"

ClarkProsecutor.org

 
 

North Carolina Department of Corrections

DOC Number: 0219316

William Quentin Jones - Chronology of Events

7/28/03 - Correction Secretary Theodis Beck sets August 22, 2003 as the execution date for William Quentin Jones.

6/23/03 - The U.S. Supreme Court denies Jones' petition for a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed Jones' conviction and death sentence following completion of initial state and federal post-conviction proceedings.

5/6/94 - The North Carolina Supreme Court affirms Jones' new death sentence.

10/3/90 - The North Carolina Supreme Court affirms Jones' convictions, but overturns the death sentence and orders a new capital sentencing hearing. Jones subsequently is resentenced to death.

11/3/87 - William Quentin Jones is sentenced to death in Wake Superior Court for the murder of Ed Peebles. He also receives consecutive sentences of 40 years for robbery with a dangerous weapon and 20 years for assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury.

 
 

N.C. Executes Man Convicted of Convenience Store Shooting Death

By Estes Thompson - Charlotte Observer

AP August 22, 2003

RALEIGH, N.C. - William Quentin Jones told his victim's family he was sorry before he was executed Friday for the shooting death of a man at a Raleigh convenience store.

Jones, 34, had been on death row since 1987, when a Wake County Superior Court jury convicted him of killing Edward Peebles, a plasterer who had stopped for coffee.

Jones was pronounced dead at 2:16 a.m. Friday after receiving an injection at Central Prison in Raleigh, where a small gallery of reporters, his family and the victim's family watched through a thick glass window. Jones winked at his lawyer and his relatives when he was brought into the execution chamber.

His brother, uncle and lawyer watched as did his victim's wife, daughter, two sisters and brother. During the 10 minutes he waited for the injection of lethal drugs, he looked repeatedly at members of Peebles' family and said, "I'm sorry." Just before the drugs put him to sleep, Jones looked back at his uncle and lawyer and said "I'm gone." He then said "I love you" several times to family.

The family witnesses made no comment after the execution. Jones' last statement was made in English and Arabic asking for mercy. Outside the prison, a group of between 30 and 40 death penalty opponents held a candlelight vigil. Stephen Dear, executive director of People of Faith Against the Death Penalty, said a drug used in executions made the death appear peaceful but paralyzes muscles and masks any pain that the inmate may feel.

Marsha Early, assistant minister at North East Baptist Church in Durham, said she came to the protest because she believes the death penalty isn't administered uniformly. "If the message is we'll kill you if you kill someone, it's not administered that way," Early said.

Jones had eaten his last meal by 5:30 p.m., while still waiting for word on whether he the U.S. Supreme Court or Gov. Mike Easley would stop his execution. Jones requested a tossed salad with shredded carrots and cheese and thousand island dressing and a soda, said Pam Walker, a spokeswoman for the state Correction Department.

Jones was 18 when he came into the store and indiscriminately fired an Uzi, killing Peebles, during a robbery on March 7, 1987. The shooting also injured another customer, Orlando Watson. Jones pleaded guilty to first-degree murder, and two separate juries sentenced him to die.

His attorneys asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene, but the court refused without comment Thursday to block the execution. Easley also declined to grant executive clemency. Peebles' family told Easley that Jones deserved to die.

A tape from a security camera showed that Jones fired six shots from a gun as he entered the convenience store. He fired before announcing that he was robbing the store and discharged a total of 10 bullets. Jones' lawyers argued that his death sentence should have been commuted because he was 18 years old at the time of the murder.

Since taking office in 2001, Easley - a former prosecutor and state attorney general - has granted clemency to two of the 12 other inmates who have had execution dates set. Of the 10 others, seven were executed. Jones' execution was the first since the state Senate approved legislation in April to halt executions for two years. The House never took up the legislation, but could consider it next year.

It also was the first since the execution of Henry Lee Hunt was stayed while the state Supreme Court reviewed, and upheld, the legality of the state's indictment form. Two more executions are scheduled this year: Hunt on Sept. 12 and Joseph Earl Bates on Sept. 26. A total of 24 people have been executed since capital punishment was reinstated in 1977.

 
 

N.C. Executes Man Convicted of Convenience Store Shooting Death

Winston Salem Journal

AP August 22, 2003

RALEIGH - A condemned prisoner sentenced to die for the shooting death of a Raleigh man visited relatives and lawyers Thursday while waiting for word of a hoped-for reprieve that never came.

William Q. Jones, 34, has been on death row since 1987, when a Wake County Superior Court jury convicted him of killing Edward Peebles, a plasterer who had stopped into a convenience store for coffee.

Jones was pronounced dead at 2:16 a.m. Friday after receiving an injection at Central Prison in Raleigh, where a small gallery of reporters, his family and the victim's family watched through a thick glass window. By 5:30 p.m., he was eating his last meal, said Pam Walker, a spokeswoman for the state Correction Department. Jones requested a tossed salad with shredded carrots and cheese and thousand island dressing and a soda, she said.

Jones was 18 when he came into the store and indiscriminately fired an Uzi, killing Peebles, during a robbery on March 7, 1987. The shooting also injured another customer, Orlando Watson. He pleaded guilty to first-degree murder, and two separate juries sentenced him to die.

His attorneys, asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene, but the court refused without comment to block the execution. Gov. Mike Easley denied clemency for Jones about six hours before the scheduled execution. "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.

Peeble's family told the governor during hearings Wednesday that Jones deserved to die. "My thoughts are people have choices. Everybody does. Now he has to suffer the consequences of his choices. My brother had no choice," said Jackie Peebles, Ed Peebles' 53-year-old sister, after meeting Wednesday with Easley.

A tape from a security camera showed that Jones fired six shots from a gun as he entered the convenience store. He fired before announcing that he was robbing the store and discharged a total of 10 bullets.

Jones' brother, Hollis Jones of Thomasville, said he had visited his brother regularly in prison and that he wasn't the same person who was convicted in November 1987. "He is also concerned about the Peebles family, as well as his own. Killing Quentin will not bring justice to them ... it will just be another person deceased," said Hollis Jones. Jones' lawyers argue that his death sentence should be commuted because he was only 18 years old at the time of Peebles' murder.

Since taking office in 2001, Easley - a former prosecutor and state attorney general - has granted clemency to two of the 12 other inmates who have had execution dates set. Of the 10 others, seven were executed. Jones' scheduled execution was the first since the state Senate approved legislation in April to halt executions for two years. The House never took up the legislation, but could consider it next year. Two more executions are scheduled this year: Henry Lee Hunt on Sept. 12 and Joseph Earl Bates on Sept. 26. A total of 23 people have been executed since capital punishment was reinstated in 1977.

 
 

Attorneys Want Clemency in N.C. Death Row Case

Charlotte News & Observer

AP August 13, 2003

RALEIGH, N.C. - Condemned killer William Quentin Jones is a changed man who does not deserve the death penalty and was never the "worst of the worst," his lawyers said today. Jones is scheduled to die at 2 a.m. Aug. 22 at Raleigh's Central Prison. He pleaded guilty to first-degree murder in a fatal shooting during a robbery at a Raleigh convenience store on March 7, 1987.

His lawyers will ask Gov. Mike Easley to spare his life at a clemency hearing next week, barring any last hour court reprieves. "The death sentence is simply the wrong punishment for this individual," lawyer Gretchen Engel said during a news conference. "Quentin Jones is clearly not the worst of the worst, for whom the death penalty should be reserved.

Engel said Jones had no history of violence before he shot and killed Edward Peebles. His supporters also say Jones has become a spiritual leader in prison who helps other inmates.

Jones' lawyers filed a motion Friday with the state Supreme Court on asking that the execution be halted, saying the death sentence was disproportionate to the crime. His clemency hearing before Easley is scheduled for Aug. 20.

 
 

Quentin Jones, North Carolina - August 22, 2003

National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty

The state of North Carolina is scheduled to execute Quentin Jones Aug. 22 for the murder of Ed Peebles during a convenience store robbery in Raleigh in 1987. Jones, a black man, was 18 years old at the time of the crime, and had no prior criminal record. This case not only highlights the excessive use of capital punishment in North Carolina and across the United States, it also demonstrates some of the key problems with the death penalty system, namely racial discrimination and prosecutorial misconduct.

Jones spent his childhood and adolescence in poverty, devoting much of his time to searching for food for himself and his brothers and sisters. His mother, who struggled with heroin addiction, was unable to care for the family, and his father was a paranoid schizophrenic who spent significant time in mental hospitals. Jones was undoubtedly traumatized by his tragic childhood, and the mitigating evidence concerning his upbringing clearly outweighs the justification for his death sentence.

This case also illustrates North Carolina’s problem with racial discrimination in the death penalty process. Studies conducted in recent years reveal harrowing statistics concerning biases in sentencing, and this year’s developments in the state legislature - which included the passage of a moratorium resolution in the senate - further support the position that the state’s capital punishment scheme is fraught with error and discrimination.

Other issues, ranging from withholding of exculpatory evidence by prosecutors to lying by a juror, also have raised questions about the fairness of this death sentence. The state’s case was that Jones carefully planned the murders and had no remorse; to support that claim, prosecutors hid critical evidence from the defense. However, investigators later learned that a Wake County jailer saw Jones within hours of the crime and said he had so much remorse he was suicidal. This information, if shared with the defense as required under Brady v. Maryland (1963), could have made a major difference in the sentencing phase of the trial.

Finally, one of the jurors that voted to sentence Jones to death lied about her knowledge of the case to get on the jury. Such situations not only cause serious conflicts in particular cases, they also compromise the neutrality of the entire justice system.

With human lives at stake, the state of North Carolina has a responsibility to ensure that its death penalty system is not plagued by discrimination, error, and misconduct. Gov. Mike Easley, who has the sole authority to grant clemency to death row inmates, should use his executive power in this case and intervene in the interest of justice. Please contact Gov. Easley and request clemency for Quentin Jones.

 
 

N.C. Executes Man Convicted Of Convenience Store Shooting Death

WRAL.com

August 22, 2003

RALEIGH, N.C. -- William Quentin Jones told his victim's family he was sorry before he was executed Friday for the shooting death of a man at a Raleigh convenience store.

Jones, 34, had been on death row since 1987, when a Wake County Superior Court jury convicted him of killing Edward Peebles, a plasterer who had stopped for coffee.

Jones was pronounced dead at 2:16 a.m. Friday after receiving an injection at Central Prison in Raleigh, where a small gallery of reporters, his family and the victim's family watched through a thick glass window. Jones winked at his lawyer and his relatives when he was brought into the execution chamber.

WRAL-TV anchorman David Crabtree was one four media witnesses to the execution. "Jones was far more animated than any other other [executions] that I had witnessed -- animated in the sense that from the moment he was wheeled into the execution chamber, he began trying to get messages both to his family members and to family members of his victim," Crabtree said.

During the 10 minutes Jones waited for the injection of lethal drugs, members of Peebles' family watched silently. "It appeared to me he took great pains to catch the eyes of each of the victim's family members to say, 'I'm sorry,'" Crabtree said. "Then he mouthed the words 'I love you' to his attorney." The family witnesses made no comment after the execution. Jones' last statement was made in English and Arabic asking for mercy.

Outside the prison, a group of between 30 and 40 death penalty opponents held a candlelight vigil. Stephen Dear, executive director of People of Faith Against the Death Penalty, said a drug used in executions made the death appear peaceful but paralyzes muscles and masks any pain that the inmate may feel. Marsha Early, assistant minister at North East Baptist Church in Durham, said she came to the protest because she believes the death penalty isn't administered uniformly. "If the message is we'll kill you if you kill someone, it's not administered that way," Early said.

Jones had eaten his last meal by 5:30 p.m., while still waiting for word on whether he the U.S. Supreme Court or Gov. Mike Easley would stop his execution. Jones requested a tossed salad with shredded carrots and cheese and thousand island dressing and a soda, said Pam Walker, a spokeswoman for the state Correction Department.

Jones was 18 when he came into the store and indiscriminately fired an Uzi, killing Peebles, during a robbery on March 7, 1987. The shooting also injured another customer, Orlando Watson. Jones pleaded guilty to first-degree murder, and two separate juries sentenced him to die. His attorneys asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene, but the court refused without comment Thursday to block the execution. Easley also declined to grant executive clemency. Peebles' family told Easley that Jones deserved to die.

A tape from a security camera showed that Jones fired six shots from a gun as he entered the convenience store. He fired before announcing that he was robbing the store and discharged a total of 10 bullets.

Jones' lawyers argued that his death sentence should have been commuted because he was 18 years old at the time of the murder. Since taking office in 2001, Easley -- a former prosecutor and state attorney general -- has granted clemency to two of the 12 other inmates who have had execution dates set. Of the 10 others, seven were executed.

Jones' execution was the first since the state Senate approved legislation in April to halt executions for two years. The House never took up the legislation, but could consider it next year. It also was the first since the execution of Henry Lee Hunt was stayed while the state Supreme Court reviewed, and upheld, the legality of the state's indictment form. Two more executions are scheduled this year: Hunt on Sept. 12 and Joseph Earl Bates on Sept. 26. A total of 24 people have been executed since capital punishment was reinstated in 1977.

 
 

Bad Actor Still Seeks a Fair Shake

By Steve Ford - Charlotte News & Observer

August 3, 2003

A certain murder trial plodding along in Durham has featured, we're told, lots of photography from the death scene: shots of the unfortunate Kathleen Peterson sprawled, bled out, at the bottom of a stairwell. An investigator's video taking jurors on a spooky walk-through.

Other images upon which we'd prefer not to dwell. Visual evidence of this sort might or might not help determine if Mike Peterson, beyond reasonable doubt, killed his wife. But whatever it was that happened to her, a fall or a bludgeoning, there's no reason to expect that it was captured by someone's candid camera.

No such ambiguity figured in the case of William Quentin Jones -- who has had 16 years to kick himself for not having been more camera-shy. It was Quentin Jones' cinematic career that went a long ways toward putting him on death row. A short career it was -- but the two Wake County juries that sentenced him to death (he was granted a resentencing hearing but flunked that one, too) could not have been favorably impressed by the security camera film showing him blowing away an innocent bystander in the course of a hold-up.

Jones was 18 when he entered a convenience store on Raleigh's North Person Street one evening in March of 1987, wearing a mask and wielding a handgun. Edward Peebles, 32, was fixing himself a cup of coffee when he was felled by one of the several shots Jones fired. The film told the tale. With Jones facing trial that fall, he pleaded guilty. The question then became whether he should be executed for the murder. The jury said that he should, meaning that he was classed among North Carolina's most heinous killers.

When the state Supreme Court said Jones should be resentenced because of flawed instructions to the jury during the first go-round, Wake prosecutors in 1991 made sure that jurors saw the damning video. It was back to death row for the photogenic Mr. Jones . Twelve years later, his appeals exhausted, the state is planning on Aug. 22 to finish him off.

One might think that for all the head-scratching and hand-wringing these days over capital punishment, this would be the sort of case that tempts even death penalty opponents to look the other way. Let's face it -- shooting some guy who just had the bad luck to be standing there when you decide to rob a store is not going to win you much sympathy from anybody. But as happens time and again -- so predictably, in fact, that it underscores one of the main arguments put forth by death penalty skeptics -- zooming in on the particulars suddenly complicates matters.

Video aside, and mindful of what a horrible thing it was for Edward Peebles to have died as he did, was Quentin Jones truly among the state's most cruel and cold-blooded killers? Not every murderer, of course, winds up atop the gurney of no return. That distinction is supposed to be reserved for the worst of the worst.

The folks at the Center for Death Penalty Litigation in Durham, gearing up to make a last-ditch clemency appeal to Governor Easley on Jones' behalf, paint a picture of a young man who endured a traumatic childhood in the violent slums of Baltimore, and who that fateful evening was zonked on drugs to the point where he could not have premeditated the killing.

He had no prior criminal record. He is said to have been so remorseful after his arrest that a jail detention officer labeled him "extremely suicidal." A jail log in which that comment was noted was never provided to the defense, and the officer was never called to testify about her observations.

Jurors are supposed to deliberate with an open mind. But according to evidence developed by the defense after Jones' conviction -- evidence that his lawyers have never had a chance to try to prove in court -- a juror at the time of his resentencing knew far more about the case than she disclosed before she was chosen to serve. She allegedly had visited the crime scene the day after the killing and expressed her outrage, and she knew that Jones already had been sentenced to death once. If true, all that hardly inclined her to impartiality.

Attorney Gretchen Engel, acknowledging that talk of "redemption and reconciliation" doesn't always go down very well in such instances, maintains still that "the person they're executing is not the person who committed the crime." For her, the bottom line is that the punishment would be excessive, given the life terms that are more typical when murders are committed during robberies as well as the overall decline in the number of death sentences being imposed.

There will be no forgetting the terrible images from the evening when Edward Peebles met his demise. But it stands to brighten North Carolina's image as a place where even killers are treated fairly as they are punished -- perhaps the acid test for our justice system and our governors -- if Quentin Jones is permitted to live.

 
 

State v. Jones, 396 S.E.2d 309 (N.C. 1990) (Direct Appeal).

Defendant was convicted in the Superior Court, Wake County, Robert L. Farmer, J., of murder, robbery and assault, and was sentenced to death. On appeal, the Supreme Court, Exum, C.J., held that: (1) defendant's confession was admissible, and (2) requirement that jury find unanimously each mitigating circumstance before the circumstance could be considered in ultimate sentencing decision was reversible error. Affirmed in part, vacated in part and remanded.

EXUM, Chief Justice.

This case arises from a robbery and shootings at a convenience store. On charges of first degree murder, robbery with a dangerous weapon, and assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury, defendant entered conditional pleas of guilty which preserved his right to appeal the trial court's order denying his motion to suppress a confession.

The jury impaneled at the sentencing hearing for the murder conviction recommended a sentence of death. The trial court entered judgment accordingly and also sentenced defendant to consecutive prison terms of forty years on the robbery conviction and twenty years on the assault conviction.

Defendant argues that his confession should not have been admitted because it was involuntary and that the judgments should therefore be vacated. He also assigns error to both the capital and noncapital sentencing proceedings. We hold that the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress, and we find no error in the sentencing proceeding in the robbery and assault cases. We remand the murder case for a new sentencing proceeding in light of McKoy v. North Carolina, 494 U.S. 433, 110 S.Ct. 1227, 108 L.Ed.2d 369 (1990).

At the capital sentencing proceeding, the State's evidence tended to show the following:

Shortly before midnight on 7 March 1987, several employees and customers were in a Raleigh Fast Fare. Defendant, wearing a ski mask and red sweatshirt, entered and fired an Uzi 9 mm pistol three to six times. Two bullets struck Orlando Watson, who, after surgery, survived the wounds he suffered. Defendant then said "this is a stickup," turned, and twice shot Ed Peebles, who was standing in the corner of the store. The bullets ruptured Peebles' aorta and a large vein, causing massive hemorrhaging and ultimately death.

Defendant then directed Charles Taylor, the man behind the counter, to open the cash register. Defendant threatened to kill him. When Taylor was unable to open the register defendant grabbed it and pulled it by the cord out the front door, around the fence, and to the side of the building.

Police Officer Tony Wisniewski, who was patrolling the area, was summoned. He entered the Fast Fare and radioed for assistance, transmitting a description of the gunman given to him by those in the store. Within minutes several other officers arrived at the scene and secured the area. There were scratches and gouges along the sidewalk where defendant had dragged the cash register.

At a low wall, Sergeant Inman observed the silhouette of someone's head, chambered a round in his shotgun and ordered the person to freeze. The figure fled, and the police gave chase, ultimately apprehending him at a ball park within several blocks of the Fast Fare. The fleeing person was defendant. Pursuing officers testified that defendant was not appreciably mentally impaired when they arrested him.

The police found a ski mask, a red N.C. State sweatshirt, the cash register, (Subsequent analysis of the cash register revealed at least one of defendant's fingerprints) and an Uzi semiautomatic weapon near the low wall where Sgt. Inman had first observed defendant. At the crime scene, the police discovered shell casings and bullets fired from a semiautomatic weapon.

A mounted video camera recorded much of the robbery and its tape was played several times at the sentencing hearing to illustrate testimony for the State and to cross-examine one of defendant's witnesses. Defendant was arrested, taken to the police station, and interrogated. Over the next two days he was questioned several more times by different officers and at different places.

Defendant's evidence tended to show the following:

Dr. Billie Corder, a clinical psychologist, examined and tested defendant three times. She obtained information about defendant from his family and about the offenses from the police. In her opinion defendant was not psychotic but his social functioning and his problem-solving ability were impaired. His emotional responses to the world were unstable.

Dr. Corder stated that defendant could be characterized as a borderline personality with antisocial tendencies. His full scale I.Q. was 92; the majority of the population has an I.Q. between 90 and 110. Defendant functioned much like an adolescent. He had no vocational skills and relied on others for financial support.

Dr. Corder learned that defendant's father had been diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic and was admitted to Dorothea Dix Hospital at least fifteen times since 1973. Defendant's mother has had a drug abuse problem since defendant was a child. Dr. Corder also learned that shortly before the crime defendant had been staying with his girlfriend and her mother. The girlfriend, who was carrying defendant's child, broke up with him three days prior to the killing. Her mother made defendant move out of the home.

Dr. Corder believed that these and other stressful occurrences exacerbated defendant's personality disorder. She also believed that defendant showed remorse, shame, and guilt during her interviews. In her opinion, defendant's ability to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law was impaired on 7 March 1987 because of his disorder exacerbated by stress.

On cross-examination, Dr. Corder admitted that at the time of the shootings defendant had the mental capacity to know the difference between right and wrong. She stated that defendant does not accept societal norms like law- abiding people. Dr. Selwyn Rose, a psychiatrist, also testified. Dr. Rose had interviewed defendant, reviewed a transcript of his confession, and viewed the videotape of the crime.

Dr. Rose believed that defendant knew the difference between right and wrong and was able cognitively to know what he was doing at the time of the crimes. Dr. Rose believed defendant had the specific intent to commit a robbery and to kill "in the primitive sense of knowing that when you squeeze a trigger somebody is going to get hit." However, as far as "thinking about, planning or wanting to kill somebody," defendant was not capable of that type of intent at the time of the shootings.

Dr. Rose believed defendant had a "borderline personality disorder" with a fragile ego. He displayed mixed traits such as immaturity, impulsiveness, substance abuse, and passive aggressive characteristics. However, none of these traits were strong enough to become diagnoses. Defendant told Dr. Rose that he had been using a substantial amount of drugs in the three days prior to the crimes and had been assaulted on the day of the robbery for the alleged disappearance of $200 worth of "reefer."

Viewing the videotape of the crime during cross-examination, Dr. Rose testified that defendant's stride and the manner in **312 which he walked into the store could not be described as unusual. In Dr. Rose's opinion, defendant's ability to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law was impaired at the time of the crimes. Dr. Rose believed that defendant's use of a mask showed planning for the robbery, but that defendant did not plan the killing.

Some of defendant's friends testified in his behalf. They stated that in the evening before the robbery, defendant had snorted cocaine, smoked marijuana, and drunk beer. According to Toni Lannette Herring, defendant was "very high" and "hyper." Ms. Emily May stated that defendant was "jittery," "nervous," and "crying" that evening. Other of defendant's friends testified in a like manner.

Defendant's parents testified about the circumstances of his upbringing. In his early life, defendant was both the victim of and a witness to domestic violence. Both his parents had suffered alcohol and drug abuse problems, and his father was a schizophrenic.

The State's rebuttal evidence tended to show the following:

On 20 February 1987, defendant and two others broke into the Triangle Jewelry and Pawn in Cary. The three men stole seven firearms, including an Uzi 9mm gun which carries up to twenty-two rounds of ammunition. Other evidence showed that defendant continued to receive financial support from his mother, who was then living in Baltimore, and his father, who was living in Raleigh.

* * * *

In summary, we conclude there was no error in accepting defendant's conditional pleas of guilty on all charges. Because of error in the capital sentencing phase of his murder conviction (87 CRS 12629), defendant is entitled to a new capital sentencing proceeding under N.C.G.S. § 15A-2000. There was no error in the Fair Sentencing Act proceedings culminating in defendant's sentences for robbery with a dangerous weapon (87 CRS 9751) and felonious assault (87 CRS 9752).

 
 

State v. Jones, 443 S.E.2d 48 (N.C. 1994) (Direct Appeal).

Defendant's robbery and assault convictions and sentences were affirmed, and case was remanded for new sentencing hearing on capital murder conviction, 327 N.C. 439, 396 S.E.2d 309. On remand, the Superior Court, Criminal Session, Wake County, Robert L. Farmer, J., entered judgment imposing death sentence. Defendant appealed. The Supreme Court, Webb, J., held that: (1) trial court erred in not allowing defendant to question prospective jurors as to their ability to follow court's instruction, but error was not prejudicial; (2) voir dire was not unduly restricted; (3) videotape showing murder was admissible; (4) jurors were adequately questioned before being excused based on reservations about death penalty; (5) submission of mitigating circumstance of no significant criminal history was not required; (6) jury was properly instructed on definition of mitigating circumstances and on application of those circumstances to decision-making process; (7) different findings as to mitigating circumstances in sentencing hearings did not violate double jeopardy; (8) prosecutor's arguments to jury were not improper; and (9) death penalty was not excessive or disproportionate. Affirmed. Exum, C.J., filed concurring opinion.

Some of the evidence at the new sentencing hearing showed that at approximately 11:45 p.m., on 7 March 1987, six people including Edward Peebles and Orlando Watson were in the convenience store. At that time, the defendant entered the store and began firing an Uzi assault rifle. Edward Peebles was killed and Orlando Watson was wounded by the rifle fire. The defendant took the cash register and left the convenience store. A video camera recorded what had happened. The police apprehended the defendant a few minutes later.

The jury found two aggravating circumstances, which were that the murder was committed for pecuniary gain and that it was part of a course of conduct which included the commission of other crimes of violence, and four mitigating circumstances. The jury found that the aggravating circumstances outweighed the mitigating circumstances and recommended the defendant receive the death penalty, which was imposed.

 

 

 
 
 
 
home last updates contact