Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, January 25, 1995 TAG: 9501250086
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: A-1 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
SOURCE: CODY LOWE STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Edmonds, sentenced to die for the robbery and murder of a Danville grocer in 1983, pursued appeals of his conviction into the last day of his life. Despite the conclusion of a federal judge in Roanoke last weekend that Edmond's Sixth Amendment right to effective counsel had been denied, there was to be no new trial, no stay of execution.
The U.S. Supreme Court turned down Edmonds' appeal shortly after 5 p.m. Gov. George Allen's office announced two hours later that the governor had rejected clemency for Edmonds.
Edmonds' trip to the death chamber followed a twisted path of legal irregularities and outright missteps.
One of the first irregularities was the last brought to the attention of the courts. Edmonds' court-appointed lawyer at his original trial - J. Patterson Rogers III - was appointed to represent another indigent client while he was conducting Edmonds' case. The other client was Laverne Coles, who was facing charges of assaulting one of her children. Coles also was a sometime lover of Edmonds and would be called by the prosecution to testify against Edmonds in his murder trial.
After Edmonds' current lawyers raised the issue, Rogers swore in an affidavit that he had explained the potential conflict of interest to both Coles and Edmonds at the time of the trial and that both approved of the arrangement. Edmonds denied that in an affidavit.
Whether his two clients approved of it or not, U.S. District Judge James Turk this week said, ``There cannot be a more blatant conflict of interest,'' and added that ``Edmonds' attorney should never have accepted his appointment to represent Coles.''
Edmonds' attorneys during his appeal contended that the conflict meant their client received an inadequate defense and that his sentence might have been different if someone with no interest in defending Laverne Cole had been cross-examining her.
Edmonds was convicted of capital murder and robbery on Nov. 17, 1983. On Dec. 12, Judge James Ingram, who heard the case without a jury, sentenced Edmonds to death on the murder charge and to life imprisonment on the robbery charge.
On Dec. 30, Rogers moved to have the sentence vacated because Ingram had failed to order and consider the required presentencing report on Edmonds. On Jan. 20, 1984, Ingram presided over another sentencing hearing, this time including hearing a presentencing report, at which Rogers requested a psychiatric examination to determine Edmonds' potential for ``future dangerousness.''
A third sentencing hearing was then held, in May 1984, with conflicting testimony as to whether or not Edmonds was likely to be dangerous in the future. At its conclusion, Ingram sentenced Edmonds to death again.
Over the next five years, Edmonds filed several state and federal appeals, all to no avail. In August 1989, however, he filed a petition with U.S. District Court in Roanoke. U.S. Magistrate Glen Conrad ruled that Edmonds' attorney had erred in not seeking to have Ingram replaced as the sentencing judge after the initial mistake of not getting a presentencing report.
In 1992, Turk adopted the magistrate's report, overturned the death sentence on grounds that Edmonds was denied effective counsel, and ordered resentencing. That decision was overturned by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled that the magistrate had incorrectly raised an issue that the defendent himself had not brought up.
Edmonds again appealed to the U.S. and Virginia supreme courts without success, including his latest request for a stay of execution this week. That was when Turk again said Edmonds' rights had been violated, but concluded that Edmonds would have received the same conviction and sentence even if he had been represented by another lawyer.
The Associated Press provided information for this story.
by CNB