Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: Kenneth Eugene Barrett - Federal

  1. #1
    Administrator Michael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,515

    Kenneth Eugene Barrett - Federal


    Trooper David W. “Rocky” Eales




    Summary of Offense:

    On November 18, 2005, a federal jury in Muskogee, Oklahoma recommended a death sentence for Barrett for the murder of a white police officer, David Eales, on September 24, 1999. The death sentence was for intentionally killing a state law enforcement officer during a drug crime and during the officer's performance of his official duties. Another officer was wounded. Barrett had already been convicted of first-degree manslaughter in state court for the murder of Eales, and he was given a 20-year sentence, followed by 10 years for the wounding.

  2. #2
    Administrator Michael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,515
    March 31, 2008

    U.S. Supreme Court denies convicted murderer's petition

    The U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition by a Sequoyah County man, who was sentenced to death in the 1999 shooting and killing of an Oklahoma Highway Patrol (OHP) trooper, asking the high court for his conviction to be reversed.

    Kenneth Eugene Barrett, 48, was convicted in federal court in November 2005 for intentionally killing OHP Trooper David "Rocky" Eales, a state law enforcement officer engaged in the performance of his duty.

    Eales, along with another trooper, was shot while attempting to serve a night-time drug search warrant at Barrett's rural home northwest of Sallisaw.

    In December 2005, Barrett was formally sentenced to death for Eales' death. He was also sentenced to two life prison sentences without the possibility of release for both using or carrying a firearm during and in relationship to a drug trafficking crime with death resulting and using or carrying a firearm during and in relationship to a federal crime of violence, with death resulting. Barrett's federal conviction was automatically appealed, which is mandatory in federal death sentences.

    In July, Barrett lost his bid for an appeal, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in Denver, Colo., unanimously affirmed Barrett's conviction and death sentence.

    Since that time, Barrett sought a remedy through the U.S. Supreme Court.

    "This petition for writ of certiorari was a two-part request," U.S. Attorney Sheldon J. Sperling announced Thursday. "First, the petitioner asked that the Supreme Court inspect the prior appellate proceedings in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals and the trial record from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma. Second, the petitioner asked the Supreme Court to determine that the proceedings below contained irregularities warranting reversal of his convictions and sentences."

    Sperling said that Barrett's attorneys argued that the Supreme Court should further consider three legal arguments: first, whether the capital scheme under which Barrett was sentenced is unconstitutional because the jury was permitted to consider, as an aggravating factor, the fact that Barrett intended to kill the victim; second, whether the search of Barrett's house was constitutionally impermissible; and third, whether Barrett was unfairly prejudiced by the admission of victim impact evidence at the penalty phase of his trial.

    "We responded in opposition to all three arguments," Sperling said. "The U.S. Supreme Court rejected Barrett's request, in all respects. The order concisely provides, 'The petition for writ of certiorari is denied.' The high court's order has been filed in the Supreme Court, in the Denver-based Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, and today, in the Muskogee-based U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma."

    Sperling referred to the findings of the federal jury trial.

    "The defendant had repeatedly boasted he would go out in a blaze of glory," Sperling said. "He repeatedly announced that he knew an outstanding arrest warrant had been issued for him. He bragged that, if the laws came, he'd take out as many as he could.

    "The decision filed today, affirms the convictions and sentences from the district court. The Supreme Court decision also has the effect of approving the decision rendered by the Tenth Circuit."

    Barrett's federal trial was his third. His first state trial in Sequoyah County ended with a deadlocked jury, while his 2nd trial resulted in a manslaughter and assault conviction. Barrett was serving a combined 30-year prison sentence for Eales' death when he was indicted in federal court.

    Throughout both trials, the prosecution argued that Barrett knew he was shooting at officers who attempted to serve a search warrant at his home, while Barrett's attorneys argued Barrett was shot first and was acting in self-defense when he fired his rifle.

    (Source: The Associated Press)

  3. #3
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    On March 16, 2009, Barrett filed a habeas petition in Federal District Court.

    http://dockets.justia.com/docket/okl...9cv00105/18344

    On August 16, 2012, Barrett's habeas petition was DENIED in Federal District Court.

    http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal...0105/18344/216

    On December 27, 2012, Barrett filed an appeal before the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

    http://dockets.justia.com/docket/cir.../ca10/12-7086/

  4. #4
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    On November 17, 2014, oral argument will be heard in Barrett's appeal before the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

    https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/...2014_Cal_0.pdf

  5. #5
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    August 19, 2015

    US appeals court orders hearing for Oklahoma man given death penalty in state trooper's death

    By TIM TALLEY
    The Associated Press

    OKLAHOMA CITY — An Oklahoma man sentenced to death for fatally shooting a state trooper deserves a hearing to determine whether his attorneys adequately defended him during the trial's penalty phase, an appeals court ruled Wednesday.

    A three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver ordered a federal judge to convene an evidentiary hearing for Kenneth Eugene Barrett, of Vian. Barrett, 54, was convicted of intentionally killing a state law enforcement officer engaged in the performance of his duty, which is punishable by the death penalty.

    Prosecutors say he opened fire on Trooper David "Rocky" Eales and other members of his Oklahoma Highway Patrol tactical team as they were about to conduct a drug raid on his cabin in Sequoyah County. Eales, 49, was killed and another trooper with him in the lead vehicle was wounded.

    Barrett argued that he didn't know he was firing at law enforcement officers, pointing out that Eales' vehicle was an unmarked white Ford Bronco that had no emergency lights.

    In his appeal, Barrett contends that his trial lawyers were ineffective because they failed to present evidence about his troubled mental state and background that might have spared him the death penalty.

    The appellate court's ruling states Barrett's jury heard evidence of his drug use, including a state prison employee's testimony that he had been using marijuana, methamphetamine, heroin, tranquilizers and other drugs up until the time of the shooting.

    But none of the defense witnesses discussed Barrett's mental health or troubled background in any significant detail, it says.

    "Defendant's own history suggests mental illness," the appellate decision says. In January 1986, Barrett attempted suicide by shooting himself in the chest with a shotgun and received psychiatric treatment. Later that year, he was involuntarily committed to a hospital after complaints from his mother and ex-wife that he was violent and suicidal, according to the ruling.

    Barrett's attorney, David Autry of Oklahoma City, and U.S. Attorney Mark Green did not return telephone calls seeking comment on the ruling.

    Barrett's 2005 federal trial marked the third time Barrett had been tried for Eales' death. A Sequoyah County jury deadlocked on a murder charge against Barrett in 2002. At a subsequent state trial in 2004, Barrett was convicted of first-degree manslaughter and assault with a deadly weapon. He was sentenced to 30 years in state prison.

    http://www.therepublic.com/view/stor...-Killed-Appeal

  6. #6
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    In today's orders, the United States Supreme Court declined to review the United States' petition for certiorari.

    Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
    Case Nos.: (12-7086)
    Decision Date: August 19, 2015
    Rehearing Denied: October 16, 2015

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/search....es/15-8565.htm

  7. #7
    Administrator Helen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    20,875
    Sequoyah County man convicted of Oklahoma trooper’s death seeks new sentence

    By D.E. Smoot
    The Muskogee Phoenix

    A Sequoyah County man convicted of the 1999 killing an Oklahoma Highway Patrol trooper will be back in federal court in Muskogee, Okla., this month in an attempt to vacate, or set aside, the death penalty.

    Kenneth Eugene Barrett, 55, was sentenced to death in 2005 after being convicted in federal court of intentional killing of a state law enforcement officer engaged in the performance of his duty. Barrett was ordered to serve two consecutive life sentences for two federal firearms convictions related to the same case.

    Appellate lawyers filed a motion in 2009 on Barrett's behalf, asking the court to grant relief from sentences meted out for convictions previously upheld on appeal. A judge in the U.S. District Court of Eastern Oklahoma denied that request in 2012, but a three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that decision and remanded the case for an evidentiary hearing, which is scheduled to begin March 27.

    The federal charges were filed after Barrett was convicted of first-degree manslaughter in Sequoyah County District Court during a second trial — the first trial ended with a hung jury — for killing Trooper David "Rocky" Eales during a drug raid at Barrett's home near Vian. Eales was a member of the OHP's tactical team that, according to court documents, led a no-knock, midnight raid on Sept. 24, 1999, with District 27 Drug Task Force members to serve a warrant.

    The appellate court limited the hearing to a single issue raised among seven during Barrett's appeal of the judge's order denying his motion for sentencing relief. The evidentiary hearing will focus on whether Barrett's trial lawyers failed to develop mitigating evidence during the penalty phase of his trial to an extent that it constitutes grounds for ineffective assistance of counsel.

    Barrett's legal team argues the trial court denied funding requested by defense lawyers for "investigative and expert resources" and failed to respond to concerns about his trial lawyers' lack of experience with death penalty cases. Those factors, Barrett's lawyers conclude, resulted with an incomplete assessment of the defendant's mental health and other issues that might have resulted with a lesser sentence.

    Federal prosecutors contend the evidence they expect to be presented will show Barrett's trial lawyers "possessed ample investigatory material upon which to make a sound tactical choice to omit mental health evidence from the mitigation case."

    Prosecutors, in documents filed with the court, state the defense tactic was based upon a "desire to maintain a rapport with the defendant" and portray him "as a beloved family member rather than the victim of familial dysfunction."

    Defense lawyers argued in both state trials and during the federal trial that Barrett was defending his home and his teenage son because he couldn't see who was attacking in the dark. Prosecutors contended Barrett knew he was shooting at law enforcers and planned to kill as many of them as he could during the raid.

    http://www.swtimes.com/news/20170310...s-new-sentence
    "I realize this may sound harsh, but as a father and former lawman, I really don't care if it's by lethal injection, by the electric chair, firing squad, hanging, the guillotine or being fed to the lions."
    - Oklahoma Rep. Mike Christian

    "There are some people who just do not deserve to live,"
    - Rev. Richard Hawke

    “There are lots of extremely smug and self-satisfied people in what would be deemed lower down in society, who also deserve to be pulled up. In a proper free society, you should be allowed to make jokes about absolutely anything.”
    - Rowan Atkinson

  8. #8
    pro pro
    Guest
    Why wasn't he tried in Oklahoma for capital murder. Surely he would have a higher likelihood of being executed.

  9. #9
    Administrator Aaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    New Jersey, unfortunately
    Posts
    4,382
    Federal death-row inmate had mitigating circumstances when he killed state trooper, witnesses say

    MUSKOGEE — A Vian man on federal death row had an extensive history of chemical dependency, psychological disorders and cognitive impairment at the time he shot an Oklahoma Highway Patrol trooper during a drug raid in 1999, an expert witness said Monday.

    Testimony began Monday morning in an evidentiary hearing in U.S. District Court in Muskogee on behalf of 55-year-old Kenneth Eugene Barrett. The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had said in 2015 that he was entitled to the hearing to determine whether his attorneys were deficient during the penalty stage of his 2005 federal trial.

    Six witnesses took the stand Monday before U.S. Magistrate Steven Shreder, who will preside over testimony until at least Thursday.

    Barrett’s defense attorneys, David Autry and Joan Fisher, have argued that his trial counsel failed to adequately compile information about Barrett’s life to present to a jury as mitigating evidence. The 10th Circuit — seemingly echoing that sentiment — wrote that the attorneys “apparently did little” in that regard.

    Assistant U.S. Attorneys Chris Wilson and Jeffrey Kahan asked the six witnesses a series of questions Monday in attempts to show that despite having support around him had he chosen to change, Barrett decided to engage in behaviors that led to his receiving a death sentence.

    Monday’s star witness, Dr. George Woods, told Autry it would be fair to describe Barrett’s upbringing as “chaotic, dysfunctional and abusive.”

    Woods, who evaluated Barrett in 2009 and earlier this year, said he concluded that Barrett has bipolar disorder and believes that Barrett was self-medicating through his use of methamphetamine.

    The U.S. Attorney’s Office said in a February filing that its medical expert evaluated Barrett in January and concluded that he did not have a mental illness. Woods disputed that, saying the evaluation didn’t properly account for Barrett’s family history of mental-health issues.

    Barrett, Woods said, had been subject to abuse even before he was born because his mother — now deceased — drank while she was pregnant, which likely limited his cognitive abilities. He said Barrett’s mother struggled with alcoholism while she tried to care for Barrett and his siblings as a single parent; Barrett’s father was not a regular presence.

    "There appears to be a deterioration in his (Barrett’s) mental state in the weeks and perhaps even the days before this event in 1999,” Woods said.
    Prosecutors will cross-examine Woods on Tuesday morning.

    Barrett was found guilty in federal court in 2005 of shooting Trooper David “Rocky” Eales on Sept. 24, 1999, while Eales and others carried out a no-knock search warrant overnight in search of methamphetamine at Barrett’s cabin.

    Trooper John “Buddy” Hamilton was seriously injured in the gunfire but survived. Barrett was shot in the leg by another trooper.

    Federal jurors also found Barrett guilty of two related weapons crimes, and he was sentenced in September 2005 to death and two consecutive terms of life without the possibility of parole.

    Four of Barrett’s family members, including his stepmother and brother, testified about their belief that Barrett needed mental-health treatment years before the shooting. They said he appeared to have significant mood swings and struggled with feelings of abandonment brought on by his parents’ divorce.

    "His life seemed to be a little chaotic,” Barrett’s uncle, Mark Dotson, said of Barrett’s adolescence, adding that at least one relative wanted to help him stay sober and healthy.

    During cross-examination, Wilson noted the seriousness of Barrett’s case.

    "And you’d agree with me, obviously, that Mr. Barrett didn’t change his lifestyle?” Wilson asked.

    “I would say no,” Dotson replied.

    Barrett had faced murder and shooting-with-intent-to-kill charges in Sequoyah County, but jurors returned guilty verdicts in February 2004 on lesser offenses of first-degree manslaughter and assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. A judge sentenced Barrett to 30 years in state prison, but he has been housed at the U.S. penitentiary in Terre Haute, Indiana, on the federal convictions since 2005.

    Several of the witnesses on Monday said they weren’t approached by Barrett’s trial attorneys to testify in his 2005 federal proceedings but said they would have detailed Barrett’s mental health history if asked.

    "There was so much mitigating evidence in this case,” said attorney Jack Gordon, who worked with Barrett during his 2004 state trial. Gordon became emotional multiple times as he described how he thinks the mitigation case on Barrett’s behalf wasn’t complete for either his state or federal trials.

    He said one of Barrett’s state attorneys worked on the federal case until he “got sick of” having inadequate financial compensation from the court and a lack of effort from his federal co-counsel. Once that attorney withdrew from the case, Gordon said, no one working on Barrett’s behalf contacted him until after his appellate attempts began.

    Barrett has a pending motion to vacate his conviction and sentence based on new U.S. Supreme Court precedent. The Supreme Court in October declined to review his case.

    http://m.tulsaworld.com/news/courts/....html?mode=jqm
    Don't ask questions, just consume product and then get excited for next products.

    "They will hurt you. They will hurt your grandma, these people. The root cause of this is there's no discipline in the homes, they don't go to school, you know, they live off the government, no personal accountability, and they just beat people up for no reason, and it's disgusting." - Former Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters

  10. #10
    Administrator Helen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    20,875
    Judge to consider whether trooper-killer who received death penalty should be resentenced

    By Curtis Killman
    The Tulsa World

    A federal judge is considering whether to approve a report that calls for a new sentencing hearing to be held for a Vian man convicted and sentenced to death in the 1999 fatal shooting of an Oklahoma Highway Patrol trooper.

    U.S. District Judge James H. Payne is weighing whether to accept a recommendation from a magistrate that Kenneth Eugene Barrett, 57, be granted a new sentencing hearing.

    U.S. Magistrate Steven P. Shreder in an August report found that Barrett received ineffective counsel during a sentencing hearing in which a jury recommended the death penalty on one of the Barrett’s convictions.

    The Muskogee federal court jury in 2005 convicted Barrett in the Sept. 24, 1999, shooting of Trooper David “Rocky” Eales.

    Eales and other members of the OHP tactical team were carrying out a no-knock search warrant just after midnight in search of methamphetamine at Barrett’s Sequoyah County cabin when they came under fire.

    The 10th U.S. Court of Appeals in 2015 ordered an evidentiary hearing be held in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma regarding whether Barrett’s trial attorneys were deficient in not investigating Barrett’s background and mental health during the penalty phase of the 2005 trial.

    After listening to seven days of testimony in 2017, Shreder issued a report and recommendation Aug. 10 that said Barrett should be given a new sentencing hearing.

    Shreder, in his 34-page report, wrote “based on all of the evidence presented both in mitigation and in aggravation, there is a reasonable probability that the result of the penalty phase of the defendant’s trial would have been different.”

    Testimony in the 2017 evidentiary hearing indicated that Barrett’s mental issues began before he was born and continued well into his childhood.

    Evidence was offered that Barrett’s mother drank alcohol during her pregnancy with him and that Barrett suffered a series of head injuries as a youth, including being hit in the head with a steel ball. Barrett was also diagnosed with bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder. Another doctor testified that test data indicated Barrett suffered from impairments in multiple areas of the brain.

    “The undersigned Magistrate Judge thus finds that this evidence regarding the defendant’s brain could have had a ‘powerful mitigating effect’ on the jury in this case,” Shreder wrote.

    While generally supporting Shreder’s recommendation, attorneys for Barrett have objected in court filings to limiting the rehearing to only the death penalty count.

    “Mr. Barrett was entitled to the effective assistance of counsel at the sentencing, the entire sentencing trial, not only as it related to the death sentence imposed,” attorneys for Barrett argued.

    In addition to the death sentence, Barrett was sentenced to life in prison on counts of drug trafficking and committing a crime of violence.

    Meanwhile, attorneys for the prosecution have objected to the report’s recommendation, citing what it claimed was Barrett’s substantial planning and premeditation of the murder as evidence that any mental health issues shown to jurors would not have affected the trial’s outcome.

    “Although the experts identified issues that supposedly compromised Barrett’s ability to process information under pressure, the defendant had resolved to murder Trooper Eales long before the opportunity arose,” the government stated in its objection to the Shreder’s findings.

    https://www.tulsaworld.com/homepagel...dce21dfcd.html
    "I realize this may sound harsh, but as a father and former lawman, I really don't care if it's by lethal injection, by the electric chair, firing squad, hanging, the guillotine or being fed to the lions."
    - Oklahoma Rep. Mike Christian

    "There are some people who just do not deserve to live,"
    - Rev. Richard Hawke

    “There are lots of extremely smug and self-satisfied people in what would be deemed lower down in society, who also deserve to be pulled up. In a proper free society, you should be allowed to make jokes about absolutely anything.”
    - Rowan Atkinson

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •