State v. Chester
| Decision Date | 16 December 2016 |
| Docket Number | No. 15-KP-2304,15-KP-2304 |
| Parties | STATE OF LOUISIANA v. TEDDY CHESTER |
| Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
On Supervisory Writ from the 24th Judicial District Court, Parish of Jefferson
Writ denied. In 1996, Chester and co-defendant Elbert Ratcliff were charged by grand jury indictment, each with first degree murder, arising from the shooting death of taxi driver John Adams. A Jefferson Parish jury found Chester guilty as charged and unanimously agreed to impose a sentence of death based on the aggravating circumstance that he committed the murder during an armed robbery or attempted armed robbery.1 This Court affirmed the conviction and sentence, State v. Chester, 97-2790 (La. 12/1/98), 724 So.2d 1276, after which the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari. Chester v. Louisiana, 528 U.S. 826, 120 S.Ct. 75, 145 L.Ed.2d 64 (1999), reh'g denied, 528 U.S. 999, 120 S.Ct. 457, 145 L.Ed.2d 377 (1999).
The evidence at Chester's trial showed that during the early morning hours of December 27, 1995, Adams was found in his taxi with one gunshot wound tothe back of the head. A pool of blood had gathered on the floorboard and there was blood spatter on surfaces within the driver's side of the vehicle. Adams's business cards were scattered around his body, just under $300 cash was left in his pockets, and a white plastic bag containing a Guess brand shirt was hanging from the handle of the rear driver's side door. Police discovered co-defendant Ratcliff's fingerprints on some of the business cards and arrested him on March 6, 1996. Ratcliff's statements led investigators to identify Teddy Chester as a person of interest.
On March 18, 1996, police received a disturbance call from a female later identified as Kaprice Pollard who reported that her sister's boyfriend was refusing to leave her apartment. She also told police that the man had been involved in a recent homicide. When the deputy arrived, he met outside the apartment with Kaprice and her sister, Quinice Pollard. Kaprice stated that the man inside the bedroom of the apartment was Teddy Chester, Quinice's boyfriend, and that he was involved in the recent homicide of a taxi driver. As the officer entered the apartment he saw someone jump out through the bedroom window. Chester was apprehended and arrested shortly thereafter.
Quinice told police that Chester came to see her on the night of Adams's murder and told her that he and Ratcliff had been involved in a robbery and that Ratcliff shot the victim. Later, while doing Chester's laundry, she noticed blood on his pants. When she questioned Chester, he replied that he had been in a fight. Her sister Kaprice told police that Chester came to the apartment on the night of the murder and took Quinice into the bathroom to talk. Kaprice reported that she listened at the door and had overheard Chester telling Quinice that he shot a taxi driver. Based on these conversations, and while Chester was being held by police, police obtained a warrant to search the house where Chester's sister lived and hesometimes stayed. Pursuant to the search, police seized a baseball cap with blood stains on it and a pair of jeans. DNA analysis later determined that neither Adams nor Chester could be excluded as the source(s) of the blood on the baseball cap.
After execution of the search warrant, Chester was advised of his rights and interviewed, giving two statements. In the first, he related that on December 27, 1995, he met with Ratcliff who was seeking to sell or trade a Guess shirt in a plastic bag for money or crack cocaine. Chester walked down the street until he saw Adams's taxi, entered the taxi on the rear passenger side, and asked Adams if he wanted to buy some crack. Adams declined and Chester exited the taxi. Chester stated that he then saw Ratcliff flag down the taxi, enter the rear driver's side, and press a revolver to Adams's head. After a brief struggle, Ratcliff disconnected the taxi radio and shot Adams in the head. While Chester hid behind a tree, Ratcliff exited and opened the driver's door. Ratcliff threatened to kill Chester if he told anyone.
After this first statement, investigators told Chester about the baseball cap with blood on it. Chester then gave a second statement in which he admitted he was inside the taxi when Adams was shot. He again stated that he had entered on the rear passenger side, keeping one leg outside on the ground. He stated that Ratcliff then entered on the rear driver's side. Chester asked Adams if he wanted to buy drugs and the victim declined. Chester admitted he would have sold Adams a fake rock of cocaine if he had been interested. Ratcliff then asked Adams if he wanted to buy anything and Adams again declined. Ratcliff told Adams, "well, Mother F**ker give it up" and placed a revolver to the back of Adams's head, whereupon Adams said, Ratcliff then disconnected the taxi radio and shot Adams. Chester noticed blood spattered on him. The taxi, which had been moving forward, hit a pole and stopped. Chesterexited from the driver's side and ran behind a tree. After Ratcliff threatened Chester not to tell anyone, the two parted ways.
At trial, the state presented the DNA analysis of the blood on Chester's cap. Prosecution witnesses testified that blood spatter was found in and around the rear driver's side, but none was found on the rear passenger side, which indicated the shooter was seated in the rear driver's side, not the passenger side, and further that Chester had been dishonest when he stated he was in the rear passenger side, because no blood was found there and Chester's clothing and cap contained blood.
The jury also heard testimony from the Pollard sisters. Quinice testified that she initially told police that Chester told her Ratcliff shot the taxi driver; however, she changed her testimony two weeks before trial to state that Chester had confessed to her that he was the shooter. She stated that she changed her account because her conscience was bothering her. When questioned by defense counsel why she initially told police that Ratcliff killed Adams, she stated that she was afraid of Chester and he told her to say these things. The prosecution also introduced portions of letters that Quinice received from Chester while he was incarcerated and awaiting trial. In the letters, Chester urged Quinice to change her testimony and to convince Kaprice to do so also, or not attend trial. One of the letters contained a threat to Quinice that he could still get to her from prison.
Kaprice's trial testimony was similar to her initial statement, that on the night of the murder she overheard Chester tell Quinice that he shot a taxi driver. She further testified that Quinice later told her that Chester was trying to rob a taxi driver and he shot him because the driver was trying to pull off with his drugs.
Chester filed his first post-conviction application in 2000 and has since filed numerous additional pleadings, including counseled supplements raising substantive claims and pro-se motions to terminate counsel and/or proceed pro se,to waive further review, and/or to expedite these proceedings. Amidst the litany of his pro-se requests, the District Court reviewed and dismissed all pending substantive claims for post-conviction relief on July 21, 2010, and subsequently denied a request to reconsider its ruling. The District Court stated specifically that it was dismissing all claims that were litigated on appeal but that it would remain open to further non-repetitive claims. In October 2011, Chester filed additional pro-se pleadings, followed by counseled supplements in 2012 and 2014. The state responded with procedural objections and substantive answers, and the District Court ordered an evidentiary hearing to resolve the limited issue of Chester's alleged intellectual disability.
After a multi-day intellectual disability hearing in November 2013 (the "Atkins hearing"), the District Court dismissed that claim because it found Chester failed to demonstrate that he suffers from impaired adaptive skills or that his intelligence, as indicated by at least one IQ score of 95, is substantially below average. Subsequently, the District Court conducted a contradictory hearing to assess the need for further evidentiary hearings, after which it issued a 20-page ruling summarily dismissing all remaining claims.
We have reviewed Chester's claims and the District Court's reasons for rejecting them and have found no reason to disturb the District Court's ruling.2
Ineffective assistance of counsel. Chester maintains that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance and urges the District Court erroneously rejected his numerous complaints about her performance.
To demonstrate an entitlement to post-conviction relief based on counsel's ineffectiveness, a petitioner must show both that (1) counsel's performance fell below objective standards of reasonableness according to prevailing professional norms; and (2) the inadequate performance prejudiced him to the extent trial was rendered unfair and the verdict suspect. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).
Chester urges that counsel erred in litigating the motion to suppress his custodial statements, in which he admitted his presence during the shooting, because she failed to show the statements were not made pursuant to a valid waiver.3 He asserts he was a scared 18-year-old with intellectual disabilities, circumstances which should have prompted counsel to argue that he could not have understood his rights well enough to knowingly and intelligently waive them.
The state bears the burden of proving that a defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his privilege against self-incrimination, but the defendant bears the burden of proving any mental abnormality which he alleges rendered his statement per se involuntary. State v. Green, 94-0887, p. 6 (La. 5/22/95), 655 So.2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial