Prosecutor opposes venue change
NEW BOSTON, Texas—Where the trial of a man accused of fatally shooting a deputy sheriff in 2011 should be held was a topic of conversation at a pretrial hearing Thursday.
Tucker Orton Strickland, 23, appeared agitated in the courtroom as his lawyer, Chief Public Defender Rick Shumaker, and prosecutor Julie Stone of the Texas Attorney General’s Office told 202nd District Judge Leon F. Pesek, Jr. of their difference of opinion concerning where the capital murder case should be tried.
Shumaker filed a motion Oct. 25 to move the case from Bowie County citing pretrial
publicity and Deputy Sherri Jones’ status as a member of local law enforcement.
In addition to a bevy of news articles published about the case in the Gazette, Shumaker attached two affidavits from county residents stating they don’t believe a fair trial is possible for Strickland in Bowie County.
Thursday, Stone filed a motion opposing Shumaker’s. She attached affidavits to her motion from Bowie County citizens who believe Strickland can receive a fair trial in Bowie County.
Stone’s motion points out that the two citizens who signed affidavits on behalf of the defense are a former secretary of the public defenders office and the defenders staff investigator.
“The criminal act occurred in Bowie County making Bowie County proper venue in this case. The majority of the witnesses reside in or around Bowie County. The crime occurred on April 18, 2011, almost 32 months ago, and is probably not ‘fresh’ on the minds of potential jurors,” Stone’s motion states.
Stone’s motion mentions the recent aggravated sexual assault trial of Jon Stover, who was acquitted, which was held in Bowie County.
“Recently a prominent member of the community was tried in Bowie County in a case that received extensive pretrial publicity, and a fair and impartial jury was able to be seated,” Stone’s motion states.
Pesek said he would consider the venue motions before Strickland’s next pretrial hearing Jan. 7.
Stone told Pesek she and Shumaker met and resolved a state request for the defense to reveal the names of any expert witnesses it intends to call on Strickland’s behalf at trial.
“We’ve agreed they’ve got to disclose any experts on sanity by January 3 and any other experts by January 10,” Stone said.
Strickland is currently scheduled for trial Feb. 3. At a previous hearing, Pesek said he would move the case to Rockwall County in light of the defense’s motion to change venue.
At the time of the shooting, Strickland was a patient at the state mental hospital in Rusk, Texas. He was transported to the courthouse basement from Rusk by Jones for a mental health hearing before County Judge Sterling Lacy.
When the hearing ended, and Jones and Strickland were alone in the basement, Strickland allegedly wrestled Jones’ service weapon from her and used it to end her life. During the hearing, Strickland was confined to the cage area in the back of the transport van.
Why Jones let Strickland out of the van is unknown. The van Jones was driving was void of communication equipment and cell phones do not work in the courthouse basement.
A report detailing Strickland’s struggles with mental illness indicates he suffers from schizoaffective disorder, has a propensity for violent behavior because of his illness, and a history of assaultive offenses involving women.
After months of consistent medication for his mental illness and psychosis, Strickland has been deemed competent to stand trial. Competency requires only that a defendant be aware of the proceedings, aware of the charges pending and able to assist a lawyer in preparing a defense.
Whether Strickland was sane at the time he allegedly ended Jones’ life is a question a jury must answer.
In October, Shumaker filed notice of his intent to raise an insanity defense. A jury could find Strickland not guilty if they determine his mental illness made it impossible for him to obey the law or understand his alleged action is a crime.
Strickland has been involuntarily committed to state mental hospitals several times. Because of case law concerning mentally ill defendants, the state is not seeking the death penalty for Strickland. If convicted of capital murder, Strickland faces life without the possibility of parole.