SANCHEZ v. STATE
2017 OK CR 22
| Okla. Crim. App. | 2017Background
- Anthony Castillo Sanchez was convicted by jury of first-degree murder, first-degree rape, and forcible sodomy; jury found three statutory aggravators and imposed death for murder (other counts: 40 and 20 years plus fines).
- Conviction and death sentence were affirmed on direct appeal (Sanchez v. State, 2009 OK CR 31, 223 P.3d 980); federal habeas relief and certiorari were previously denied.
- Sanchez filed a second application for capital post-conviction relief asserting newly discovered statistical evidence (a 2016 study published in 2017 in the Oklahoma Death Penalty Review Commission Report) showing race/gender disparities in Oklahoma death-penalty charging and sentencing.
- The study (Pierce, Radelet & Sharp) found greater odds of a death sentence for homicides with white victims, especially white female victims, compared with non‑white male victims.
- Sanchez sought discovery and an evidentiary hearing to probe whether race/gender influenced prosecutors’ charging and the jury’s sentencing in his case.
- The Court applied Oklahoma’s gatekeeping rules for successive capital post-conviction applications and denied relief and discovery, finding the claim procedurally barred and the proffered statistical evidence legally insufficient to show discriminatory influence in his specific case.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Sanchez's second post-conviction claim is timely/allowable as "newly discovered" under Oklahoma Rule 9.7 and 22 O.S. § 1089(D) | Sanchez: 2016 study published 2017 is newly discovered factual basis not available earlier | State: Patterns were ascertainable earlier; Sanchez failed to show facts unavailable with reasonable diligence | Denied — claim procedurally barred; petitioner did not show factual basis was previously unavailable |
| Whether statistical evidence of systemic race/gender disparities entitles Sanchez to relief from death sentence | Sanchez: Study shows race/gender decisively influenced charging/sentencing, violating constitutional rights | State: Statistics alone insufficient to prove purposeful discrimination in his case; legitimate reason is his premeditated aggravated murder | Denied — statistics do not establish clear and convincing evidence that race/gender biased decisionmakers in his specific case |
| Whether discovery and evidentiary hearing are warranted to investigate race/gender influence in his prosecution | Sanchez: Needs access to DA policies, case-level data, and other materials to prove discriminatory practice | State: No entitlement to discovery/hearing when claim is procedurally barred and evidence insufficient on its face | Denied — discovery and hearing not allowed where claim is procedurally barred and lacks requisite proof |
| Whether McCleskey v. Kemp forecloses relief based on statewide statistical disparities | Sanchez: Argues patterns show unconstitutional discrimination here | State: Relies on McCleskey precedent that statistical disparities alone do not prove purposeful discrimination in individual cases | Court: Agrees with State; follows McCleskey — statistical disparities do not by themselves establish purposeful discrimination requiring relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Sanchez v. State, 223 P.3d 980 (Okla. Crim. App. 2009) (affirming conviction and death sentence and reviewing aggravators and mitigation)
- McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (U.S. 1987) (statistical evidence of racial disparity insufficient to prove purposeful discrimination in an individual death-penalty case)