Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: David Ison Sentenced to LWOP in 2011 IN Slayings of 5

  1. #21
    Administrator Helen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    20,875
    IN man convicted in 5 murders may get new trial

    Posted by FOX19 Digital Media Staff

    FRANKLIN COUNTY, IN (FOX19) - David Ison, the man charged with killing five people in Franklin County, is now asking for a new trial.

    Ison was charged with five counts of murder in the September 2011 slayings of Roy Napier, 50, his estranged wife, Angela, 47; their children, Melissa, 23, and Jacob, 18, and neighbor, Henry X. Smith, 43, in Laurel, Ind. Investigators said Ison killed the family over drugs.

    Detectives said they received information after conducting a search at the home Ison was staying that linked him to the five victims.

    They were able to formally charge Ison based upon results they gained from the arrest, search warrants and further investigations.

    He was sentenced to life without parole.

    Ison claims his guilty plea wasn't voluntary, and he also claims inadequate representation from his attorney.

    An Indiana appellate court judge is considering whether to grant a new trial.

    http://www.fox19.com/story/34905381/...-get-new-trial
    "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

  2. #22
    Senior Member CnCP Legend CharlesMartel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    FRANCE
    Posts
    3,073
    Court of Appeals denies post-conviction relief for murderer

    By DEBBIE BLANK
    THE HERALD-TRIBUNE

    After years of trying, Franklin County convicted murderer David Ison, now 52, won an appeal almost a year ago.

    The three Court of Appeals judges involved in the March 14, 2017, decision directed Franklin Circuit Court Judge Steven Cox "to make specific findings of fact and conclusions of law with respect to Ison’s claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel and involuntariness of his guilty plea."

    The court document summarized the case. "On Sept. 25, 2011, Roy Napier, Angela Napier, Melissa Napier, Jacob Napier and Henry Smith (parents, two children and a neighbor) were murdered in Franklin County (at Stipps Hill Road near Laurel). Shortly thereafter, Ison became a suspect and blood and DNA evidence were recovered from his (Glenwood) home, as well as two firearms that had been used in the shootings. At the time of the killings, Ison was on probation for unrelated convictions on 10 counts of burglary. In sum, Ison had 20 prior felony convictions.

    "The state charged Ison with five counts of murder (Counts I through V) on Oct. 7, 2011. Franklin County Prosecutor Melvin Wilhelm struggled with whether to seek the death penalty and eventually consulted with the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council’s capital litigation committee, which advised him to seek the death penalty."

    Nevertheless, according to the court document, "Wilhelm spoke with Ison’s trial counsel, Hubert Branstetter, regarding the possibility of a plea agreement in which Ison would plead guilty to life imprisonment without parole (LWOP) to avoid the death penalty." The defendant signed the document, agreeing to LWOP. This document, which Ison believed to be a plea agreement, was never filed with Franklin Circuit Court."

    On Dec. 28, 2017, Indiana Court of Appeals Judge Mark Bailey wrote a memorandum decision, affirmed by Judges James Kirsch and Rudolph Pyle III. Their conclusion: "Ison has not demonstrated his entitlement to post-conviction relief on grounds of involuntariness of his pleas or the ineffective assistance of counsel. The post-conviction court did not erroneously deny Ison post-conviction relief."

    Ison presented two issues for review:

    • Whether he entered his pleas involuntarily due to a lack of waiver of his Boykin rights; and

    • Whether his trial counsel was ineffective for engaging in deception to secure a plea agreement and for failing to ensure that Ison affirmatively waived his Boykin rights.

    In Boykin vs. Alabama, the Supreme Court held that it was reversible error for the trial court to accept a guilty plea without an affirmative showing that it was intelligent and voluntary. “More particularly, Boykin requires that the record must show, or there must be an allegation and evidence which show, that the defendant was informed of, and waived, three specific federal constitutional rights: the privilege against compulsory self-incrimination, right to trial by jury and the right to confront one’s accusers.”

    On June 9, 2017, Cox "entered findings of fact, conclusions thereon, and an order denying Ison post-conviction relief. This appeal ensued."

    The court decision noted, "The post-conviction court made factual findings that Ison had, at the initial hearing on Amended Count VI, been advised by the trial court of his rights and potential penal consequences. Second, the post-conviction court concluded that Ison, having entered numerous guilty pleas in the past, must have understood that he was waiving his Boykin rights by pleading guilty.

    "Ison now contends, 'If I would have been given my Boykin rights before I pled guilty to counts I, II, III, IV and V, I argue I would have never plead (sic) guilty”; “Also the way the hearings were done mislead (sic) me: making me think that I did not have the Boykins (sic) for Counts I, II, III, IV and V, only for Count VI they gave them to me in the context of Count VI I didn’t even know I had them for Counts I, II, III, IV and V”; and “If I knew I had the Boykin rights for Counts I, II, III, IV and V, I would have insisted on a jury trial,” noted the appellant's brief.

    According to the court document, "At the post-conviction hearing, Ison testified in narrative form and, in relevant part, stated: “I didn’t understand what exactly it was. All I knew is I was coming over here to plead guilty.” ... However, Ison had been convicted of 20 prior felonies, primarily in guilty plea proceedings. As for Ison’s claim that his substance use had rendered him unable to comprehend and remember prior advisements, it is belied by his assertions at the guilty plea hearing. The post-conviction court did not find Ison’s claim of misunderstanding to be credible ...

    "Ison also contends that his trial counsel was ineffective. Specifically, Ison claims that his counsel conspired with the prosecutor and the trial court judge to withhold information as to the minimum sentence available and to manipulate Ison into agreeing to a LWOP sentence. According to Ison, his attorney affirmatively misled him into thinking that a death penalty allegation had been formally filed, failed to properly pursue Ison’s desire to withdraw his guilty pleas and failed to ensure that Ison understood his right to appeal."

    The Indiana Court of Appeals noted, "We will not second-guess trial counsel’s strategy and tactics unless they are so unreasonable that they fall outside objective standards ... Isolated mistakes, poor strategy, inexperience and instances of bad judgment do not necessarily render representation ineffective."

    The document continued, "We observe that Ison did not call his trial counsel as a witness at post-conviction proceedings. Thus, the post-conviction court was permitted to infer that Ison’s counsel would not have corroborated Ison’s allegations of deception, collusion and intentional withholding of pertinent information. So, too, could the post-conviction court infer that trial counsel would not corroborate Ison’s testimony that he demanded that counsel attempt withdrawal of the guilty pleas and counsel reported back to Ison that he attempted withdrawal, but the judge flatly refused and said that Ison was fortunate to escape death.

    "Without trial counsel’s testimony or other witnesses, we are left with Ison’s testimony that he would have insisted upon going to trial had he known that a death penalty request had not been formally filed and that a person convicted of murder could potentially receive a minimum sentence of 45 years."

    "The State appeared to have overwhelming evidence against Ison, including physical evidence, DNA evidence, and a statement from Ison’s girlfriend, who claimed that she had been outside the residence at the time of the murders. Ison’s purported motivation was his desire to obtain prescription drugs."

    Ison remains incarcerated at the Wabash Valley Correctional Facility, Carlisle.

    http://www.batesvilleheraldtribune.c...c94c6768a.html

  3. #23
    Administrator Heidi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    33,217
    INDIANA COURT REJECTS APPEAL BY MAN CONVICTED IN 5 KILLINGS

    An Indiana appeals court has rejected the latest request by a man convicted of fatally shooting five people in southeastern Indiana in 2011 who sought to appeal his guilty pleas and sentence in those slayings.

    In a ruling issued last week, the state Court of Appeals dismissed David Ison’s appeal of a trial court’s decision that denied him the opportunity to file a belated appeal of his guilty pleas and sentence, the Palladium-Item reported.

    Ison, 54, had pleaded guilty in March 2012 to the five killings. He was sentenced to five life-without-parole sentences, and he’s currently serving that sentence at the Wabash Valley Correctional Center in Carlisle.

    Ison was convicted of fatally shooting the five victims in September 2011 in and near a mobile home in rural Laurel, about 50 miles southeast of Indianapolis. Those killed were: Roy D. Napier, 50; Angela Napier, 47; Melissa L. Napier, 23; Jacob L. Napier, 18; and Henry X. Smith, 43.

    A probable cause affidavit alleged the shootings were linked to Ison’s efforts to buy prescription painkillers.

    Since his sentencing, Ison has repeatedly sought post-conviction relief and challenged his guilty pleas and sentence in court filings.

    On Feb. 3, he petitioned the Franklin County trial court seeking to be allowed to pursue a belated appeal. Ison claimed, without documentation, that he had diligently sought to appeal the guilty pleas.

    After the trial court denied that petition, he raised the issue with the appeals court. The state’s motion supporting the dismissal of Ison’s request argued that his petition was improperly attempting to circumvent the appeals court.

    In last week’s ruling, the appeals court dismissed Ison’s request without explanation.

    Ison has repeatedly argued in his requests for post-conviction relief that he was made to feel that he was eligible for the death penalty, when he actually was not.

    Ison also has argued that he agreed to his plea deal in order to avoid the death sentence and contended that he was not aware that the judge should have considered aggravating and mitigating circumstances before pronouncing his sentence.

    Ison has suggested that his drug use and history of mental illness around the time of the killings could have been mitigating factors.

    In December 2019, Ison asked the state appeals court to allow him to seek post-conviction relief of his sentence. The court rejected that request in January, finding that his claims and documentation did not establish a reasonable possibility that he would be successful.

    https://www.wthitv.com/content/news/...572006801.html
    An uninformed opponent is a dangerous opponent.

    "Y'all be makin shit up" ~ Markeith Loyd

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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