Without comment, the United States Supreme Court has declined to hear the appeal of Texas death row inmate Amos Wells, Forest Hills.
A jury sentenced Wells to die by lethal injection for the July 1, 2013 murders of Chanice Reed, her mother Annette Reed and her 10-year old brother Eddie McCuin.
The shooting happened at a home on Pate Street in Fort Worth where Reed lived with her mother, her grandmother and two brothers.
Court documents say Wells drove to Reed’s home late in the afternoon after she did not answer his phone calls. An argument started that spilled into the front yard. A man working on his driveway, two houses away, saw Wells get a gun out of his SUV, shoot Reed, then shoot Annette Reed when she tried to slap the gun out of his hand, according to court records.
“Based on statements from witnesses and family members gathered at the scene, officers focused on [Wells] as the prime suspect.
At 6:35 p.m., the police dispatcher issued an alert to be on the lookout for a shooting suspect described as a ‘black male, 22 years of age, Amos, unknown clothing, possibly occupying a gray or gold Tahoe, last seen eastbound on Wilbarger,’” a court filing said.
During the trial the defense raised a dubious claim that appeared to backfire.
“Mr. Wells’s trial counsel presented racist junk science at the penalty phase of his trial to tell the jury that Mr. Wells—an African American man—was predisposed to violent behavior because of his genetics,” an appellate attorney wrote in a brief.
“Despite trial counsel’s inexplicable concession during the sentencing trial that genetics predestined their client to be a danger to society, the state court denied Mr. Wells any opportunity to prove that his trial counsel were ineffective by presenting evidence in support of his claim.
Instead, it denied Mr. Wells his day in court and adopted nearly wholesale the State’s recommended findings of fact and conclusions of law.”
Indeed prosecutors were able to turn the claim into evidence that Wells presented a future danger to the prison population, an element necessary to secure a death penalty.
It struck some as a high risk defense.
“I would have said you have to be kidding me, but I would have said it with at least some sympathy because I’ve seen what defense lawyers have to work with.” said appellate lawyer Michael Casillas, who is not involved with the case.
He says the Supreme Court most likely looked at the claim and decided there was nothing that could have resulted in an unfair trial.
“They can say, okay, this is an interesting claim but probably stemming from a situation where the defense had nothing else to offer, nothing else they could try to argue.” Casillas said.
The case now goes back to a Tarrant County District Court judge, who will set an execution date. More appeals can be filed, but Casillas says other, more routine claims that are typical in death penalty cases can be filed.
Related
LISTEN on the Audacy App
Sign Up and Follow NewsRadio 1080 KRLD
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram
