A Miscarriage of Justice

Update on Anthony's Situation

ORDER

AND NOW, this 26th day of February 2004, upon consideration of the Petition of Habeas Corpus Relief, Under Article I, Section 14, of the Pennsylvania Constitution and For Statutory Post-Conviction Relief Under the Post-Conviction Relief Act filed on behalf of Petitioner, Anthony G. Fletcher, the Commonwealth's response, and the evidentiary hearing granted thereon, is hereby ORDERED and DECREED that relief is GRANTED on Claim I of the Petition and Petitioner's convictions and sentence of death are VACATED for the reasons stated by the Court on the record on February 26, 2004. It is further ORDERED that relief in the form of a new trial is GRANTED on Petitioner's Claim I. Because this Court has granted a new trial, it does not reach the merits of Petitioner's claims for penalty-phase relief.

BY THE COURT:

JOHN M. YOUNGE, J.

Judge Younge's Official Opinion - Click here to read Judge Younge's reasons for the ruling

Court Transcripts

How was Anthony Fletcher convicted and sentenced to die?

On January 29, 1993, Anthony Fletcher was convicted of first degree murder. A week later the jury decided that he should be given the death penalty, and on February 21, the court sentenced him to die.

Anthony has never denied that he was involved in an altercation with Vaughn Christopher on March 2, 1992. During that altercation, Christopher suffered two gunshot wounds, and died in hospital, 12 hours later. Anthony claims that days before the shooting, Christopher had robbed him of approximately $50. On the night the shooting occurred, Anthony saw Christopher on the street and confronted him. Christopher pulled a gun out, and a struggled ensued, resulting in Christopher being shot twice with his own gun.

The prosecution claims that Anthony intentionally shot Christopher over a drug debt. They made their case relying heavily on the testimony of eye witness, Renee Grant, who's account was further backed up by the testimony of medical examiner Dr. Hood.

At the time of the trial, Ms. Grant had several outstanding charges dating back almost four years. On February 3, 1993, only a few days after Anthony was convicted, she was given probation on three of these charges. An affidavit from Dr.Hydow Park (Dr.Park was out of the country and unavailable to testify at the trial) has since stated that the deceased's wounds were not consistent with Ms. Grant's testimony but were consistent with Anthony Fletcher's account.

Dr. Hood has also signed an affidavit recanting testimony that he made at the trial regarding the injuries to the deceased.At the trial, Mr. Hood testified that there was no evidence of a physical struggle, specifically regarding bruising on the deceased's chest, which he stated was caused by the bullet entering the chest wall. Hospital records clearly indicate that there were no internal injuries to the chest. Here is the x-ray report from the hospital. Had Anthony Fletcher's counsel obtained hospital records they would have been able to counter that testimony. Not only did counsel not obtain hospital records but they also did not talk with either Dr. Park or Mr. Hood prior to the trial.

At Anthony Fletcher's preliminary hearing (March 26, 1992), the prosecution stated that the gun shot wounds were to the "right side and thigh". They also stated that Dr. Park would be available at trial to testify.

At the actual trial, the prosecution changed their stance by stating that the fatal shot was fired into the deceased's back. The prosecutor referred to this as the "coup de grace in the back". They needed to drill into the minds of the juror's that the shot was intentional to undermine the position of the defense, that the shooting had occurred during a face to face struggle. They were allowed to make this damaging change without being challenged, because Anthony Fletcher's trial counsel never contacted Dr. Park or the hospital to determine the exact nature of the injuries.

Extracts from Dr. Park's Affidavit

29. The trajectory of the bullet that wounded Mr. Christopher's right thigh is consistent with a firing that would occur if a right-handed man pulled a pistol and a left-handed man, directly up against him and in a physical struggle with him, seized control of the gun and fired it towards the man's leg, since the physical confrontation and struggle would explain why gun was fired steeply downwards into Mr. Christopher's right thigh.

30. I therefore believe that Mr. Fletcher's account of the shooting is consistent with the trajectory of the wound to the right thigh, while Ms. Grant's account is not.

34. The shot to the decedents lower right flank, with its subsequent, slightly upwards and forward trajectory through the body, more likely occurred through a struggle over a handgun between a right-handed person who drew it and a left-handed person struggling with him face to face, because the pushing and pulling in the midst of the struggle over the gun could readily account for the gun pointing inwards and slightly upwards. Vis-à-vis the decedent's body when it went off.

35. I believe that the shot to the decedents right flank is, therefore, more likely and more plausibly explained if there were a hand-to-hand struggle shortly after the gun was drawn at the decedents right flank, which could have occurred under Mr. Fletcher's account, than if the shooting occurred, as Ms. Grant said, with Mr. Fletcher shooting the decedent front some feet away as the decedent turned.

According to the report of operations from the hospital, the bullet entered the abdomen through the patient's right flank . Based on the x-ray report showing the position of the bullet in the patient's left upper quadrant, it is clear, that the bullet travelled laterally through the body. Clearly, the deceased was not shot from behind.

In order to further discredit Anthony Fletcher's position, the prosecution stated that there was "no evidence of close range firing on the victim's skin." The perioperative nursing record from the hospital clearly show that before surgery, providone solution was used to clean the entrance wound. In order to help determine where the shots were fired from, all that was needed were the clothes worn by the deceased. According to the office of the medical examiner, the clothing was never turned over. Read Dr. Hood's affidavit regarding this matter. Clearly, the hospital did not lose the clothing, as it is also listed on the perioperative nursing record.

It is clear that the prosecution has had to completely twist the evidence, using misleading and false testimony to make their version of events hold up. The facts are clear, the evidence supports Anthony Fletcher.

Anthony Fletcher remains behind bars while the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office decides whether to appeal Judge Younge's decision or retry the case.

More evidence...