STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

COUNTY OF RICHMOND

IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE

SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION

FILE NO.:

95 CRS 1670

 

                          


                                                      )

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA              )

                                                      )        STATE’S RESPONSE TO    

vs.                                                   )        DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR

                                                      )        EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE

JERRY LEE HAMILTON,                       )        MOTION FOR APPROPRIATE

                                    Defendant     )        RELIEF

                                                      )

 

         NOW COMES THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, by and through Michael D. Parker, Chief Assistant District Attorney for the Twentieth Prosecutorial District Attorney’s Office and responds to the above named defendant’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Motion for Appropriate Relief dated 17 August 2000. 

  1. While the undersigned prosecutor, on behalf of the State, did agree to an extension of time for the defendant’s filing of his Motion for Appropriate Relief, the State feels compelled to respond to the Defendant’ Motion for Extension of Time to File Motion for Appropriate Relief, due to allegations of bad faith implied in Defendant’s said Motion. 
  2. The Defendant was tried for first-degree murder and sentenced to death on 5 March 1997 by the Honorable Russell G. Walker.
  3. The Supreme Court of North Carolina affirmed the Defendant’s conviction and death sentence on 8 October 1999.  SEE State v. Hamilton, 351 NC 14, 519 S.E.2d 514 (1999).  The United States Supreme Court denied Mr. Hamilton’s petition for a writ of certiorari on 1 May 2000.  SEE Hamilton v. North Carolina, 68 U.S.L.W. 3685 (1 May 2000). 
  4. The defendant’s post conviction counsel improperly “demanded” discovery by a date certain in an improperly addressed letter to the District Attorney’s Office dated May 12, 2000.  As result of this error, the District Attorney’s Office did not prompt notice of the request.
  5. The undersigned subsequently contacted defendant’s counsel and informed him of the error and later advised him of how to properly file the request. 
  6. The undersigned advised defendant’s counsel that we would comply with the request relating to the files of agencies involved in the prosecution and investigation of the Hamilton murder in our possession.  Counsel was also told that the medical examiner’s files and any SBI files would be provided to him by the Attorney General’s Office in Raleigh[1].  The undersigned also requested a list of any other files that the defendant wished to see. 
  7. The undersigned advised defendant’s counsel that the State’s files were voluminous and would require time to compile and index; and, despite the improper request, the undersigned informed defendant’s counsel that the State would immediately begin the compilation and indexing process. 
  8. NCGS 15A-1415(f) provides that “The State, to the extent allowed by law, shall make available to the capital defendant’s counsel the complete files of all law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies involved in the investigation of the crimes committed or the prosecution of the defendant.”
  9. The State informed the defendant that we would be happy to make these files available to the defendant immediately upon compiling and indexing them.
  10. Defendant made repeated efforts to have the District Attorney’s Office photocopy the files for him to pick up and review.  The undersigned informed defendant that the District Attorney’s Office did not have the staff, nor the equipment, to make the requested copies.  Additionally, counsel was informed that the statute only required the State to make the files available, not copies.  However, the undersigned informed defendant’s counsel of a copy shop in Rockingham, with whom we had previously used in 15A-1415(f) discovery, where defendant could copy any and all portions of the requested files himself. 
  11. A discovery session was scheduled for 20 July 2000, only three days after the Court’s Order for the State to produce the files, and the State fully complied with its discovery obligations on that date.  However, despite the State’s best efforts to accommodate the defendant counsel’s need for copies, defense counsel did not request to meet at the copy shop and instead appeared at the Richmond County District Attorney’s office and “inspected” the State’s files. 
  12. On 20 July 2000, and on all following relevant dates, the State produced for the Defendant the entire prosecutorial and investigative files as ordered by the Court, see attached AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE. 
  13. While the State fully complied with its statutory 1415(f) discovery obligations on 20 July 2000, defendant’s counsel again contacted the undersigned requesting copies of the file.  Defendant’s counsel was again informed that the District Attorney’s office would not make copies of the files, but that the State would make the file available at a copy shop for the defendant to copy.  Defendant finally agreed to this arrangement.  However, the prosecutor who handled the previous discovery session was in court the following week and the DA’s investigator was on vacation, the earliest date the State could make the files available again was 11 August 2000. 
  14. On 11 August 2000, the State made the entire prosecutorial and investigative files available to the defendant at the Quick Copy Shop in Rockingham, North Carolina, where an associate of defendant’s counsel photocopied the entire file. 
  15. From the undersigned’s first conversations with the defendant’s counsel through the last, the undersigned informed counsel that it would take several weeks to compile and index the State’s file and repeatedly informed counsel that the State would not object to an extension of time if counsel found it necessary to complete his MAR, due to the volume of discovery provided. 
  16. However, the State, by and through the undersigned, strongly resents defendant counsel’s implication that the State intentionally delayed discovery to prejudice defendant’s MAR and defendant’s implication that the State has withheld information, files and responsive information. 
  17. The State has agreed to an extension of time for the defendant, not because the State has been lazy, unresponsive to defendant’s requests or dilatory in our efforts to comply with our constitutional and statutory obligations, but rather because it is the right thing to do to assure the defendant a fair opportunity to have his claims presented and evaluated. 
  18. The State provided the Defendant a fair trial; a fair sentencing hearing, timely and full post conviction disclosure and stands ready to defend this response at any hearing the Court may Order.

Wherefore the State Prays the Court:

 

  1. Allow any extension of time the Court finds appropriate and necessary for the Defendant to prepare his MAR; and,

 

  1. Order any hearing on these claims the Court deems relevant and material to determine the truth of the allegations contained in the Defendant’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Motion for Appropriate Relief.

 

         This the _____ day of ______________________, 20_____.

 

 

                                                      ____________________________________

                                                      Michael D. Parker

                                                      Chief Assistant District Attorney

                                                      20th Prosecutorial District

                                                      Post Office Box 1065

                                                      Monroe, North Carolina 28111-1065

                                                      (704) 289-3340


[1] References to the “entire prosecutorial and investigative files” in this response and the attached affidavit refers to files in the possession of the 20th District Attorney’s Office and does not refer to files provided to defendant by the Attorney General’s office.