ASHTON v. STATE
2017 OK CR 15
| Okla. Crim. App. | 2017Background
- Isaac Luna Ashton was convicted by a jury of two counts of First Degree Murder and one count of Unlawful Carrying of a Weapon; sentenced to life without parole on each murder count (to run consecutively) and 30 days for the weapon offense (concurrent).
- Victims Verdell Walker and Tiara Sawyer were shot in a parking lot outside Ashton’s apartment; multiple eyewitnesses placed Ashton as the shooter; neither victim was armed.
- Ashton fled the scene with two companions; police later arrested him and recovered a .38 revolver whose fired projectiles matched those recovered from the victims.
- One companion, Tyesha Goff, invoked the Fifth Amendment at trial and did not testify; the defense sought to admit a prosecutor-prepared summary of her out-of-court statements but the trial court excluded it.
- Ashton claimed self-defense and accidental discharge; he also admitted to lying to police initially and to carrying the handgun without a license.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether allowing Goff to invoke the Fifth deprived Ashton of a complete defense | Goff’s pre-flight statements were non-incriminating; exclusion denied Ashton his defense | Goff faced real risk of prosecution (accessory to felony); privilege proper; no immunity required | Court: No abuse of discretion; Fifth Amendment protection properly allowed and immunity not compelled; summary exclusion harmless/cumulative; claim denied |
| 2. Whether the jury flight instruction was improper | Flight instruction assumes guilt and shifts burden | Flight instruction appropriate where defendant testifies and claims panic/self-defense; well-established precedent | Court: Instruction proper; no plain error; claim denied |
| 3. Prosecutorial misconduct (threatening witness, improper argument, sympathy appeals, misstatement of law) | Prosecutor intimidated Goff, argued facts not in evidence, expressed opinion on credibility, appealed for sympathy, misstated law on punishment considerations | State: Prosecutor legitimately advised about Fifth Amendment risk and sought counsel appointment; closing arguments were grounded in evidence or responsive to defense and not misleading | Court: No substantial interference with witness; comments reasonable/ invited or based on evidence; cumulative effect did not deny fair trial; claim denied |
| 4. Ineffective assistance for failure to test Walker’s shirt for gunshot residue | Testing could have undermined State’s theory of distance/intent; counsel’s omission prejudicial | Record shows uncertain value of unperformed testing; strong eyewitness and forensic case; no reasonable probability of different outcome | Court: Under Strickland, no prejudice shown; evidentiary hearing denied; claim denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Crane v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 683 (U.S. 1986) (defendant’s right to present a complete defense)
- Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284 (U.S. 1973) (limits on excluding reliable, critical defense evidence)
- Maness v. Meyers, 419 U.S. 449 (U.S. 1975) (broad construction of Fifth Amendment privilege)
- Webb v. Texas, 409 U.S. 95 (U.S. 1972) (court or government coercion that drives a defense witness off stand can deprive defendant of due process)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-part test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- United States v. Pablo, 696 F.3d 1280 (10th Cir. 2012) (distinguishing improper threats from proper advice about Fifth Amendment and counsel)
- United States v. Serrano, 406 F.3d 1208 (10th Cir. 2005) (no substantial interference where independent counsel advised witness about privilege)