Subscribe
Jobs
Cars
Real Estate
Apts
Classifieds
Shop
CHICAGO – Nothing was typical about the case of convicted quadruple-murderer Joseph E. Corcoran, but whether a plea offer made by the then-Allen County prosecutor was appropriate is now a matter to be decided by a federal appellate court.
Monday afternoon, Indiana Deputy Attorney General James Martin argued that Allen County Prosecutor Robert Gevers’ offer to withdraw the death penalty during plea negotiations was within his prosecutorial discretion.
Even if that offer came with the caveat that Corcoran give up his right to a jury trial and allow a judge to decide his fate.
A three-judge panel of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago took up the case after Indiana Attorney General Steve Carter appealed a ruling by a federal judge overturning the death penalty, saying Gevers’ offer violated Corcoran’s constitutional rights.
The federal judge’s ruling was the latest step in years of wrangling over Corcoran’s death sentence after he was convicted of murdering his brother, his sister’s fiancé and two of his brother’s friends in July 1997.
Both sides had 30 minutes to present their arguments Monday, and as they spoke, the three judges – William J. Bauer, Ann Claire Williams and Diane Sykes – questioned the lawyers on their interpretations of the law and their arguments.
Gevers’ offer to withdraw the death penalty in exchange for a bench trial instead of a jury trial was no different than any other negotiation common when both sides try to hammer out plea agreements, Martin argued.
“So what was the actual harm to Corcoran by this offer,” Judge Williams asked Martin.
“There was none, your honor,” Martin replied, adding that had a judge decided his case, Corcoran could have been acquitted and escaped the death penalty in that way as well.
But Williams pushed Martin a bit on the issue, asking whether there is a limit to what constitutional rights prosecutors can get defendants to bargain away, even the right to a lawyer or the right against self-incrimination.
Missouri-based attorney Larry Komp, arguing for Corcoran as his court-appointed counsel, said Corcoran should not be penalized for exercising his right to a jury trial.
But Judge Bauer seemed to disagree.
“To say you can’t piecemeal (plea agreements) is to fly in the face of what’s been going on in every (negotiation) in the history of plea bargains,” Bauer said. “What case says you can’t do that?”
Williams again asked how Corcoran was harmed by Gevers’ offer and asked whether following Komp’s argument could lead all prosecutors to forgo seeking plea agreements.
Also at issue before the appellate court is whether Corcoran was competent to waive his rights to have a judge re-evaluate his sentence – a process known as post-conviction relief.
The federal judge upheld an earlier ruling by the Indiana Supreme Court that found Corcoran made a rational choice when he decided not to seek such a review.
Komp said three medical experts found Corcoran suffered from delusions, possibly paranoid schizophrenia.
When Corcoran waived his right to have a judge re-evaluate his sentence, saying he believed execution was an appropriate punishment for the murders of four people, Corcoran was trying to end his own agony.
But Martin argued that the doctors who evaluated Corcoran believed he understood what the process involved and what the consequence would be if he decided not to pursue it.
There is no time frame for the federal judges to issue a ruling, which could come in as little as a few days or take as long as a year.
rgreen@jg.net
