 |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Kentucky Supreme Court affirms Alley murder conviction Melodie Phelps News Editor The Kentucky Supreme Court has affirmed the murder conviction of Michael Alley, in a ruling issued April 21. Alley was convicted of the murder of Janet Zimmerman Pyles, during a jury trial held in Wayne County in the fall of 2002. The trial was held nearly seven years after Pyles was shot at a local convenience store, as the question of Alleyıs competency to stand trial was debated. Several trial dates were set throughout the seven year period, and Alley was declared both incompetent and competent to stand trial during that time. Alley, according to testimony during the trial, suffered a closed head injury in a car accident several years before the shooting occurred. The Supreme Court ruling noted that Alley had been hospitalized for mental problems at least seven times since the 1980 automobile accident. Alley was declared competent to stand trial in July 2002 and the trial began in October 2002 before Circuit Judge Robert Wilson. Commonwealth Attorney Larry Rogers prosecuted the case. Alley was represented by James Cox and Carolyn Cox. In his appeal to the Supreme Court, Alley argued that the trial judge committed an error and denied the defendant due process by failing to find that he was incompetent to stand trial. Alley alleged that the preponderance of evidence proving that he was incompetent was established. The Supreme Court ruling notes that a day-long evidentiary hearing was held on the issue of Alleyıs competency. ³The record indicates there is substantial evidence to support the finding of the trial judge as to competency,² the opinion states. It also notes that the fact that the judge accepted the testimony of one doctor as more credible than another is permissible in making the decision regarding competency. ³The trial judge had the authority to accept the medical evidence that he believed was most credible and convincing,² the Supreme Court opinion states. ³He made extensive findings of fact with regard to evidence and determined that Alley had failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that he was incompetent to stand trial in light of evidence to the contrary. ² Also in the appeal, Alley alleged that the trial judge erred by failing to hold a hearing to determine whether he should be forcibly medicated at his trial. Alley was prescribed medication by doctors who evaluated his mental healthy and put together a treatment plan. Alleyıs attorneys had filed a motion asking that his psychiatric medication be stopped prior to the trial and not resumed until after the trial. The basis of this motion was that Alley was not on medication at the time of the offense and it medication was discontinued the jury would witness his physical and mental state on the day of the shooting. During a hearing on the motion, Judge Wilson noted that the defendant was not court ordered to take any medication, and he said that he could not direct Alley to either take or not take medication. ³It is clear from our review of the record that the trial judge never declined jurisdiction, but correctly determined that the proper motion was not before him,² stated the Supreme Court opinion. The opinion also states, ³If a defendant claimed he was not culpable for a crime because he was intoxicated, should he be permitted to get drunk during trial in order to demonstrate his state at the time of the offense? Clearly not and it is equally preposterous to ask the court to order Alley to stop his medication so that he could exhibit his mental instability.² The Supreme Court found no merit with Alleyıs argument that the federal due process clause was violated because the aggravating circumstance relied on by the prosecution was not set forth in the indictment. ³It has been recognized that aggravating circumstances even for the death penalty do not have to be charged in the indictment,² the opinion stated. The Supreme Court also stated that Alley should not have received a directed verdict on the burglary aggravator charge, as he argued in his appeal. Alley said that he was entitled to a directed verdict on the uncharged crime of burglary which was used as an aggravating factor. The Supreme Court cited KRS 511.020, which defines burglary, and noted that while Alley did not take anything from the store, he did enter the building armed with a .22 caliber rifle and shot Pyles, as well as another clerk on duty who was wounded. ³Alley received a fair trial. He was not denied any of his due process rights under either the state or the federal constitutions,² the Kentucky Supreme Court opinion noted. ³The judgment of conviction is affirmed.² Alley is currently serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole for 25 years. He has been incarcerated since the shooting occurred in 1995, and Commonwealth Attorney Larry Rogers stated that Alley will not be eligible from release from prison any earlier than 2020. Add a comment |
|
|
@ 2005 The Wayne County Outlook For more information, see our online Privacy Policy. |