Court Upsets Death Sentence, OKs Dual Juries

The state Supreme Court on Tuesday overturned the death sentence of a Lancaster man but upheld the use of two juries to simultaneously try the cases of the accused murderer and his co-defendant.

The justices approved an unusual double-jury procedure that has won cautious acceptance in the courts as a way to save time and money and to avoid needless duplication when co-defendants face similar charges involving much the same evidence and many of the same witnesses.

The court unanimously rejected the contention that the procedure denied a fair trial to Von Maurice Harris. Harris, 29, was convicted in the 1982 murder of a 17-year-old Palmdale High School student after a $350 robbery at a convenience store where the youth worked.

The dual jury was permissible in this case, the justices said, and Harris’ conviction must stand.

“Although no statute sanctions the use of two juries, the procedure affords a practical and reasonable means by which to minimize the inconvenience and not inconsiderable burden on those witnesses who would otherwise have to testify in separate trials, and to conserve judicial resources,” Justice David N. Eagleson wrote for the court.

While agreeing that Harris suffered no harm from the process, Justice Stanley Mosk issued a separate opinion saying that he is concerned about encouraging the use of multiple juries without specific authorization by statute.

“In this instance there were two defendants and two juries. Would we be asked to approve of three juries if there were three defendants? Or more if there were multiple defendants?” Mosk asked. “Judges must comply strictly with the procedural requirements prescribed by the Legislature, and should be hesitant to improvise.”

The court held that Harris was entitled to a new penalty trial because the judge improperly told jurors that the governor could commute a sentence of life without parole to allow Harris’ eventual release.

As in prior decisions, the court ruled that the since-abandoned instruction unfairly encouraged jurors to speculate and was misleading because the alternative sentence of death also can be commuted by the governor.

Harris’ attorney on appeal, Mark E. Cutler of Cool, Calif., welcomed the court’s reversal of the death sentence but expressed disappointment with the affirmation of the conviction.

“I had hoped the court would see the problems of a dual jury,” Cutler said. “It’s certainly an unusual procedure . . . and if it is to be used at all, it should be used in the simplest of cases--not in a complicated capital case like this one.”

The state prosecutor handling the case declined comment pending review of the court’s opinion.

Harris and his co-defendant, Larry Alan Davison, were charged in the murder of Stanley Fahey, who was found dead from three gunshot wounds in his back in the desert outside Palmdale after a robbery at the store where he was working alone on Dec. 7, 1982.

By law, jointly charged defendants ordinarily must be tried jointly. But separate trials can be ordered to keep jurors from unfairly considering evidence against one defendant--such as a confession--as evidence against another defendant.

To save time, money and duplicated testimony and evidence, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert S. Fratianne rejected separate trials and impaneled two juries to sit in the courtroom to try Harris and Davison at the same time.

This double-jury procedure has been used in relatively few instances but was upheld by a state Court of Appeal in 1981 on the only occasion that the procedure was under appellate review in California.

The judge instructed the two juries not to discuss the case among themselves and took steps to remove one defendant’s jury when a witness was to testify only about the other defendant. But of 28 witnesses, 25 still gave testimony heard by both juries.

Harris, accused of shooting Fahey while the boy’s hands were tied behind his back, denied involvement in the crime, but the prosecution presented several witnesses who said Harris had admitted the killing.

Harris, facing capital charges in the case, was convicted and sentenced to death. Davison also was convicted of murder and sentenced to 25 years to life in prison. In a separate appeal, his conviction was later overturned by a state appellate court on grounds unrelated to the use of two juries in the case. Davison recently pleaded guilty to manslaughter, according to Cutler.