Oklahoma court denies Holtzclaw's appeal

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals has upheld the conviction and prison sentence of a former Oklahoma City Police officer convicted of sexually assaulting women while on duty and off.

Thursday's ruling was unanimous.

Daniel Holtzclaw was found guilty by an Oklahoma County jury in December 2015 of 18 sexual offenses, including four counts of first-degree rape, involving eight victims. He is serving a 263-year prison sentence.

He denied assaulting the women and did not testify in his own defense.

Holtzclaw, 32, was charged with 36 counts that accused him of sexually assaulting 12 black women and one black teen between December 2013 and June 2014 while a police officer.

Attorneys representing seven women suing

Holtzclaw and the city called it a day of joy and vindication for their clients.

“They have been really dreading the thought of Daniel Holtzclaw getting an opportunity to either get out of prison or having a new trial, that they would have to go back through and testify again,” attorney Damario Solomon- Simmons said. “This has been torture for them. They are still trying to heal. As someone who represents, and we represent sexual assault victims, we know that healing process is everlasting.”

Holtzclaw claimed in his appeal, filed in February 2017, that a “circus atmosphere” deprived him a fair trial.

Holtzclaw also claimed his trial attorney failed to present expert testimony pertaining to the DNA evidence. The youngest victim's DNA was found inside and outside of Holtzclaw's pants. At trial, defense attorneys contended the DNA was transferred there after he interacted with the then- 17- year- old girl while on duty. In his appeal, Holtzclaw contended a “secondary transfer, rather than direct sexual contact” was more likely given the small DNA sample.

Vice Presiding Judge Dana Kuehn wrote the court's opinion, finding “sufficient evidence” in the 52-page document to support Holtzclaw's convictions and rejecting the claim his cases — 36 allegations involving 13 victims — should not have been joined into a single trial.

In the filing, Holtzclaw's attorneys listed multiple incidents from the trial that dealt with “an inflamed community atmosphere.” One incident noted in the appeal was a “story on the news ... making a big deal about the racial makeup of the jury.” Also noted in the appeal was when the jury could hear protesters outside the courthouse chanting, “Give him life.”

The appeals court rejected that argument.

“The record does not support a conclusion that jurors were so affected by the incidents that they abandoned impartiality,” the opinion stated. “The fact that jurors acquitted Appellant of half the charges against him supports our conclusion that they were not improperly affected by events outside the courtroom.”

Presiding Judge David Lewis, Judge Gary Lumpkin, Judge Robert Hudson and Tulsa County District Judge William J. Musseman, sitting in by assignment, concurred with Kuehn, rejecting additional claims that overzealous argument by prosecutors denied him a fair trial, his trial counsel was ineffective, and his sentence was excessive.

“This case involves a sexual predator who happened to be employed, most unfortunately, as an Oklahoma City police officer,” Lewis wrote. “He used his position of authority to intimidate and prey on vulnerable victims. The facts and circumstances of this case, including his position of authority, the number of victims, and the callous nature of the offenses, dictate that consecutive sentences in this case are entirely appropriate. His arguments attacking the convictions are likewise unavailing.”

Race was a prominent issue from the time the case against Holtzclaw was announced. The racial aspect became more significant during the trial because the jury was all-white and all the victims were black. Court records listed Holtzclaw as “Asian or Pacific Islander.” James Lockhard and Michael Morehead, the attorneys representing Holtzclaw on appeal could not be reached for comment.

In a media statement, Holtzclaw's family called him an innocent man who was wrongly convicted.

“We disagree with the Court that the circus mob atmosphere that hijacked Daniel's trial did not deprive him of a fair trial,” the statement read. “Of course, it did. And we vehemently disagree with the vicious and false assertion in Judge David Lewis's concurrence that Daniel was a ` sexual predator' who abused his authority. It was detectives and prosecutors who abused their authority to manufacture false allegations against Daniel.”

Four civil lawsuits are pending, Solomon-Simmons said.