By NADIA PFLAUM
Johnson County District Attorney Phill Kline might have lost his opportunity to stick Edwin Hall 
with the death penalty if Hall is found guilty of Kelsey Smith’s slaying.
During a hearing today in front of Johnson County District Court Judge Peter Ruddick, Hall’s defense attorney, Paul Cramm, contended that Kline has screwed up his petition for the death penalty so badly that the entire document is defective. Kline misstated case law in his petition and failed to sign the document with the proper signature block.
These errors were egregious enough to warrant that the death penalty be dropped as a potential sentence in the case, according to Cramm. Instead, life in prison without parole would be the maximum sentence if Hall is convicted. Cramm cited other cases in which judges had thrown out 40 years as the maximum possible sentence based on inaccurate paperwork filed by the prosecution.
Judge Ruddick then asked Kline, “You agree that the petition filed August 1, 2006, did not comply with Supreme Court rule 111?”
Kline said, “True.”
The judge continued, “If we’re talking about whether this is a matter of form over substance … it begs the question, why wasn’t it done right? Any idea?”
Kline had no answer for that question. But after a moment, he said, “This basically turns the statute on its head … It’s the statute that defines procedure.”
His argument was familiar to anyone who’s observed Kline in his years in Topeka before becoming the Johnson County district attorney: the argument that the Legislature trumps the Supreme Court. It was reminiscent of Kline’s days railing against “activist judges.”
But it might not have been a very wise argument to bring up in front of a judge.
Ruddick seemed to agree with Cramm, when the judge said that death penalty cases ought to be weighed against the highest standard.
Also today, Cramm argued that the case against Hall should be thrown out entirely because Kline withheld evidence from the grand jury that indicted Hall.
Ruddick agreed at least in part with Cramm, saying, “Frankly, the testimony that occurred in front of the grand jury is inconsistent, at the very least.” The judge called the inconsistent statements a detective made in front of the judge, versus what the grand jury got to hear, “surprising.” The grand jury, he explained, did not hear that other people besides Hall were identified and interviewed as possible suspects during the initial investigation of Smith’s disappearance.
Kline brushed the blame off on the detective. Kline said the detective believed at the time that an additional suspect’s alibi had been determined, when in fact it wasn’t determined until much later.
The judge also took it upon himself to define the word “alibi” for Kline, saying, “An alibi isn’t an excuse. It’s Latin for ‘in another place.’” But Ruddick denied the defense’s motion to throw out the case, saying that regardless of the evidence the grand jury missed, there was plenty of evidence against Hall to establish enough probable cause to indict him.
Ruddick declined to throw out Hall's indictment. But as to whether the judge would throw out the death penalty, Ruddick said he’d take the matter “under advisement” and rule later.
The next hearing in Hall’s trial will be heard before Ruddick on July 23.
Kline would have filed for the death penalty for Hall in Aug. 2007, not 2006. Regret the error, will fix.
Posted at: July 9, 2008 7:51 PM