LITTLE ROCK — A Pulaski County circuit judge refused Tuesday to overturn the second-degree murder conviction of a 47-year-old Little Rock woman whose attorneys were concerned that jurors might have improperly consulted law books to reach their unanimous verdict.
Pamela Hooks’ attorneys petitioned Judge Leon Johnson for a new trial after deputy public defender Tammy Harris found two law books, a sentencing guideline and a list of evidence used at Hooks’ May trial in the jury room on the first business day after Hooks’ conviction.
Hooks was sentenced to 47 years in prison for causing the death of her longtime boyfriend, 60-year-old John Davis, by provoking him into an October 2010 fight. A previous conviction for a violent crime means she cannot be paroled.
Davis suffered 68 superficial cuts and scratches, mostly on his face, and the injuries and stress of the fight caused Davis to have a heart attack. Hooks was charged with second-degree murder because she didn’t intentionally kill Davis, prosecutors said at trial.
The books, copies of the criminal code and court rules belong to prosecutors and are kept in the courtroom; defense attorneys sometimes take them into the jury room, where they consult privately with clients.
Jurors would not have been allowed to consult the books or see the evidence list, which had handwritten notes from one of Hooks’ attorneys.
On the Monday after the Friday verdict, Harris said she found the books and guidelines stacked on the juryroom table, with the two-page evidence list tucked into the spiral-bound guidelines. Harris said she was the first one in the room, arriving at court early to prepare for clients.
Hooks’ attorneys summoned the 12 jurors to court Tuesday, and defense attorneys and prosecutors questioned the nine women and three men one-on-one for about 50 minutes.
Three jurors had vague recollections about books being in the room, with one juror saying she thought another juror might have picked up and briefly opened one of the books, but she wasn’t sure who it could have been or when that might have happened.
Defense attorney Liz Hooks, no relation to Pamela Hooks, argued that the jurors’ recollections were sufficient grounds for Johnson to vacate Pamela Hooks’ conviction and order a new trial. Johnson needed only to decide it was a “reasonable possibility” that jurors had been improperly swayed, she said.
The contention that jurors consulted the books is “absurd,” deputy prosecutor Hugh Finkelstein told the judge. He countered that the defense had no proof that jurors had seen, read or been influenced by the books.
The vague recollections of fewer than a third of the jurors was not sufficient proof of any wrongdoing, Johnson said.
“I don’t find there’s a reasonable possibility ... their vote was tainted,” Johnson said.
Arkansas, Pages 17 on 07/27/2012