Ariz. Court Overturns Death Sentence

By PAUL DAVENPORT,

PHOENIX -The state Supreme Court on Friday overturned a man's murder convictions and death sentences in a Tucson triple slaying after finding that a decorated prosecutor misled jurors. By using false testimony to bolster a key witness' credibility, Kenneth Peasley, a two-time state prosecutor of the year, deprived Andre Lamont Minnitt of a fair trial, the Supreme Court said Friday.

Peasley's conduct amounted to "calculated deception" intended to cover up weaknesses in his case, Chief Justice Charles E. Jones wrote in the 5-0 ruling. Minnitt cannot be tried again on murder and other charges stemming from a June 24, 1992, robbery of the El Grande Market in Tucson. He still must serve a 36-year sentence for another armed robbery. Minnitt's first two murder trials, both handled by Peasley, ended in an overturned conviction and a mistrial, respectively.

The high court said it threw out the convictions from Minnitt's third trial, which Peasley did not prosecute, because the damage from the first two trials had already been done. "Whether or not the third trial was free from false testimony, falsehoods in the two previous trials permeated the process to the extent that fairness in the third trial could not correct the misdeeds of trials one and two," Jones wrote. Peasley, a veteran homicide prosecutor, stepped down as Pima County's chief criminal deputy in June 1999 when the state bar association found probable cause to investigate him.

He remains a deputy county attorney but no longer handles criminal cases. Peasley did not return a call for comment Friday. Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall said she was "embarrassed for the office and personally saddened" by the court's ruling. The court found that Peasley elicited false testimony from former Tucson police detective Joe Godoy. Peasley repeated the testimony in his arguments to the jury.

 Peasley asked Godoy whether Minnitt and two other men were suspects before the interview of a key witness, a convicted felon. In a false statement that made the witness seem more credible, Godoy testified that the men had not been suspects earlier. Godoy said if he had told the truth, he could have caused a mistrial.

 He had identified the men as suspects before the interview based on information from confidential informants, and evidence gleaned directly from such sources is not admissible at trial. Peasley's "only explanation was that he forgot the correct sequence of events and that during the (second) trial his health was poor.

Moreover, Peasley admits his mistakes but surprisingly claims they do not amount to misconduct," Jones wrote. "The argument is not persuasive." The State Bar of Arizona launched a disciplinary case against Peasley, resulting in a hearing officer's recommendation that Peasley be suspended from practicing law for 60 days and placed on probation for one year. Peasley and the bar have appealed to the Supreme Court's disciplinary commission.