GUILTY AR - Jeremy Travis, 27, stabbed to death, Fort Smith, 11 Sept 2010

[fran]

A man who represents himself in court, has a FOOL for a client!

 

[nanny2five]

thank you for the report mareca0301. i think he is going to try and delay everything as long as he can. i will refrain from saying anything else since i dont want to get a websleuths time out praying for justice for jeremy and strength for his family!

 

[Jeremysmom]

When I stood up I said I want him to see my face. He did halter and I thought he smirked and I said don't you smirk at me. I don't think he fired his lawyer for the trial he wants to represent himself for the appeal. His drug paraphernalia charge was in 1990 at which time he was caught with a crack pipe on his home which he said it wasn't his but added my pipe was in the alley. What an idiot ! He also stated that he thought they were giving him the max of 14 yrs because of "the recent event" and that he was guilty of battery only and he had proof that would prove his innocence . ???? Is he trying to say he didn't kill my son? Who did then, his brother??? I don't know anything about Tucker but I was pretty shaken up so maybe I didn't hear everything. At any rate I do have a meeting tomorrow with the prosecutor so I'll know more tomorrow.

 

[Jeremysmom]

Correction the drug paraphenalia charge was in 2006 not 1990.

 

[nanny2five]

Correction the drug paraphenalia charge was in 2006 not 1990.

ohhh jeremysmom! i am so sorry you had to even lay eyes on him, much less interact with him. God bless you!! rumor has it that yes he is going to try and lay the murder of your son off on his brother! we will not let that happen!! he made a phone call immediately afterward and told what he had done! imo dusty is equally responsible and i want him to go down too, but that might be too much to hope for. i believe they had a plan to lure jeremy into a "friendly" night out. <modsnip>. he isnt going to get out of this, no matter what he says. my daughter is going to testify to everything he said about it. in fact, walter lee walton might get a huge surprise when trial time comes and his "friends" come out of the woodwork to testify against him.

 

[Jeremysmom]

Thank you and please thank Your daughter for me too. I think it was planned too but whenever o talk to the detectives about it they say there is no proof of it being planned.

 

[mareca0301]

Thanks to you nanny2five and to your daughter. I only can hope and pray that others will come out and tell the truth. I figure the brothers will rat each other out--how sad and how fitting. It bothers me to think the judge at the parole hearing wished Walter good luck and said he seemed like an intelligent man. This info came from one of my brothers also at the hearing when Walter was rattling off his demands and stating he was innocent. AND, how could it not have been planned? Does every one carry around pipes and guns?

 

[Jeremysmom]

That point is one I have tried to make many times and they keep telling me that lee always carried around a pipe and a knife. That's what the witnesses have said. I'm so sick and tired of hearing "the witnesses" cause the witnesses are Dusty, Wendy, and Deanna . Please! It's disgusting!

 

[mareca0301]

It is disgusting. We can only hope and pray that there are other, more reliable witnesses that can shed a different light on this 'planning'. We think it had to be...We were just discussing Jeremy at the hospital while waiting for our dad to get out of surgery. Jeremy had this BIG head and these stick-out ears, so, one of our brothers called him Yoda. He was so funny and spirited as a little boy, full of grins, the little imp..
It is hard to remember how he died. So, that is why it is so hard NOT to believe that this murder was not planned in advance.

 

[mareca0301]

Merry Christmas, Jeremy and Falisha. You are in our hearts and minds. I am also thinking of my childhood friend, Jo Ellen Mills (Jody) who was murdered in the late 70's. God Bless you all as you are now safe in God's hands. No one can ever hurt you again. We miss you all.

 

[Jeremysmom]

Merry Christmas to my precious Angels in Heaven. Please help us to find some peace. I love you both with all of my heart and soul. I'm trying so very hard to carry on, I will forever hold your memories in my mind and heart! Justice for you Jeremy my sweet child. I promise you that!

 

[Jeremysmom]

Happy new Year Jeremy!

 

[Jeremysmom]

Please don't forget my child

 

[Snoopster]

I will not forget Jeremy.

I am very late to this thread. I've just finished reading most of it and I still have tears in my eyes.

My warmest thoughts are with you Jeremysmom, and the rest of the people who were touched by Jeremy and his big heart. May you regularly brush off those many wonderful memories you have of Jeremy and let them fill you with love time and time again.

Rest in Peace, Jeremy
:rose:

 

[Jeremysmom]

Thinking of you today as always. Rest in peace Jeremy! Love, Mama

 

[mareca0301]

I love you, Jeremy and I strive to keep your case in the forefront. I am so sorry NOT to have been here every day to post for you. You have a 'STEP' cousin Sara who died night before last. Your uncle Donnie's beautifully wonderful wife, Nancey,lost her mama and her baby girl within 2 days. Sarah succumbed to viral meningitis.She left 2 little beautiful toddlers/infants. Carlos, their daddy, is left to pick up the pieces. Donnie and Nancey are doing everything to enfold them into their lives/home. I have a really hard time of wondering WHAT god has in store with us..Then, I see the new babies that are our families coming into our fold. Steph gave you another beautiful baby boy cousin, I have Skyler, we have to have faith.

 

[mareca0301]

I love you, jeremy. I pray for you every night.

 

[mareca0301]

From our criminal justice expert, our sister and Jeremy's sweet aunt: Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From:
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:50:52 -0500
{mod edit}



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Walter Lee WALTON v. STATE of Arkansas CACR 94-971___ S.W.2d___ Court of Appeals of Arkansas Division I Opinion delivered March 20, 1996 1. Criminal law -- use of physical force and deadly physical force in defense of person. -- Under Ark. Code Ann. 5-2- 606(a) (Repl. 1993), on which AMCI 2d 704 is based, a person is justified in using physical force upon another person to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he may use a degree of force that he reasonably believes to be necessary; under Ark. Code Ann. 5-2-607(a)(2) (Repl. 1993), on which AMCI 2d 705 is based, a person is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person if he reasonably believes that the other person is using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force. 2. Criminal procedure -- jury instructions -- defense -- must fully and fairly declare applicable law -- no error in refusing where there is no basis in evidence to support giving. -- Where the defendant has offered sufficient evidence to raise a question of fact concerning a defense, the instructions must fully and fairly declare the law applicable to that defense; however, there is no error in refusing to give a jury instruction where there is no basis in the evidence to support the giving of the instruction. 3. Criminal procedure -- jury instructions -- defense -- evidence did not warrant giving of instructions on use of physical force or deadly physical force. -- The appellate court held that the evidence did not warrant the giving of a jury instruction on the use of force in self defense where there was no evidence from which the jury could have found that appellant, an inmate at the Arkansas Department of Correction, responded with anything other than deadly force because he admitted to stabbing the victim, a correctional officer, with a knife and testified, moreover, that the victim did not advance toward him with his night stick until he had slipped out of his handcuffs and brandished his knife; once appellant threatened him, the officer could lawfully use non-deadly physical force against appellant; thus, the appellate court held that the giving of an instruction on the use of deadly physical force in self defense was not warranted because the evidence did not show that appellant reasonably believed that the officer was using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force. Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court; Fred D. Davis, III, Judge; affirmed. Maxie G. Kizer, P.A., for appellant. Winston Bryant, Att'y Gen., by: Vada Berger, Asst. Att'y Gen., for appellee. James R. Cooper, Judge. *ADVREPCA6* DIVISION I CACR94-971 March 20, 1996 WALTER LEE WALTON APPEAL FROM THE JEFFERSON COUNTY APPELLANT CIRCUIT COURT [NO. CA94-165-3] VS. HON. FRED D. DAVIS, III, CIRCUIT JUDGE STATE OF ARKANSAS AFFIRMED APPELLEE James R. Cooper, Judge. The appellant was convicted in a jury trial of battery in the first degree and sentenced to seven years in the Arkansas Department of Correction. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in failing to give jury instructions AMCI 2d 704 on the use of physical force in defense of a person and AMCI 2d 705 on the use of deadly physical force in defense of a person. We disagree and affirm. The appellant admitted that he had stabbed the victim, Ferbia Allen, a correctional officer at the Tucker Maximum Security Unit. The appellant testified, however, that he was defending himself from unlawful actions of the correctional officers. At the close of the evidence, the appellant proffered the instructions on the justification defenses. The trial court found that the testimony was insufficient to warrant the giving of either instruction. The victim, Sergeant Allen, testified that he had gone to the appellant's cell in punitive isolation on the day of the incident to question the appellant about throwing something on Officer Coleman, a correctional officer under Sergeant Allen's supervision. After going to the appellant's cell, Sergeant Allen discovered that it was flooded and needed to be cleaned. Sergeant Allen testified that he handcuffed the appellant and brought him out of his cell. He further testified that while he and the appellant were standing in the hallway, he heard a noise in the control room and stepped away from the appellant to investigate. The appellant then slipped out of his handcuffs and stabbed Sergeant Allen in the side with a homemade knife or shank. Sergeant Allen testified that the appellant then ran back into his cell, got the broom the porter was using, and began swinging it. Although he had been stabbed, Sergeant Allen managed to kick the appellant's cell door closed. He testified that he was not armed with a night stick at the time of the stabbing. He further testified that he had not had any problems with the appellant prior to the stabbing. The appellant testified that he and the victim had a number of problems prior to the incident. He testified that the victim used abusive language, failed to feed him, failed to give him exercise yard call, and failed to release him from his restraints so that he could use the restroom. The appellant testified that on the day of the incident he was unable to turn the water off in his cell and that Officer Coleman refused to turn it off for him. He stated that he subsequently threw some of his food on Officer Coleman's shirt. The appellant testified that Sergeant Allen eventually came to his cell and turned his water off. The appellant testified that Sergeant Allen handcuffed him and brought him out of the cell and that the two of them stood outside the cell while Officer Coleman was at a nearby control booth. The appellant testified that he and Officer Coleman began to exchange words and that Officer Coleman subsequently came out of the control booth armed with a night stick. The appellant testified that Officer Coleman said, "it's dying time," and raised his night stick. The appellant explained that he then slipped from his handcuffs, raised his knife and told the officers to get away from him. He stated that he stabbed Sergeant Allen when he came toward him because he thought Sergeant Allen was going to hit him with his night stick. The appellant acknowledged, however, that Sergeant Allen did not come toward him with his night stick until he had pulled out his knife. He further testified that he pulled the knife to keep Officer Coleman from hitting him when he came out of the control booth. He testified that he retreated to his cell and used a broom to fight off the advances of the correctional officers. The appellant testified that he was eventually able to close the gate to his cell to prevent the officers from entering. An inmate, Revis Leon Hamilton, testified that he overheard Sergeant Allen threaten to "bust his [appellant's] head the first chance he got." He also testified that the officers were armed with night sticks. Another inmate, Danny Floyd, testified that he was in a cell near the appellant's on the day of the incident. He testified that he witnessed Officer Coleman run out of the control booth with his night stick, heard a scream and then witnessed the officers run back into the control booth. He stated that Sergeant Allen was "holding his gut". AMCI 2d 704 is based on the defense provided by Arkansas Code Annotated 5-2-606 (Repl. 1993) which states: (a) A person is justified in using physical force upon another person to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he may use a degree of force that he reasonably believes to be necessary. However, he may not use deadly physical force except as provided in 5-2-607. Arkansas Code Annotated 5-2-607 provides: (a) A person is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person if he reasonably believes that the other person is: (2) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force. Where the defendant has offered sufficient evidence to raise a question of fact concerning a defense, the instructions must fully and fairly declare the law applicable to that defense. Lair v. State, 19 Ark. App. 172, 718 S.W.2d 467 (1986). However, there is no error in refusing to give a jury instruction where there is no basis in the evidence to support the giving of the instruction. Purifoy v. State, 307 Ark. 482, 822 S.W.2d 374 (1991). Here, we find that the evidence does not warrant the giving of either instruction. The instruction on the use of physical force in self defense was not appropriate because there was no evidence from which the jury could have found that the appellant responded with anything other than deadly force since he admitted to stabbing the victim with a knife. Moreover, the appellant testified that the victim did not advance toward him with his night stick until he had slipped out of his handcuffs and brandished his knife. Once the appellant threatened him, Sergeant Allen could lawfully use non-deadly physical force against the appellant. See Ark. Code Ann. 5-2-605(2) (Repl. 1993). Thus, the giving of the instruction on the use of deadly physical force in self defense was not warranted because the evidence did not show that the appellant reasonably believed that Sergeant Allen was using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force. Affirmed. Pittman and Rogers, JJ., agreeSent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From:
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:50:52 -0500
To: Subject: Emailing: He did stab a jailer. See report below.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Walter Lee WALTON v. STATE of Arkansas CACR 94-971___ S.W.2d___ Court of Appeals of Arkansas Division I Opinion delivered March 20, 1996 1. Criminal law -- use of physical force and deadly physical force in defense of person. -- Under Ark. Code Ann. 5-2- 606(a) (Repl. 1993), on which AMCI 2d 704 is based, a person is justified in using physical force upon another person to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he may use a degree of force that he reasonably believes to be necessary; under Ark. Code Ann. 5-2-607(a)(2) (Repl. 1993), on which AMCI 2d 705 is based, a person is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person if he reasonably believes that the other person is using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force. 2. Criminal procedure -- jury instructions -- defense -- must fully and fairly declare applicable law -- no error in refusing where there is no basis in evidence to support giving. -- Where the defendant has offered sufficient evidence to raise a question of fact concerning a defense, the instructions must fully and fairly declare the law applicable to that defense; however, there is no error in refusing to give a jury instruction where there is no basis in the evidence to support the giving of the instruction. 3. Criminal procedure -- jury instructions -- defense -- evidence did not warrant giving of instructions on use of physical force or deadly physical force. -- The appellate court held that the evidence did not warrant the giving of a jury instruction on the use of force in self defense where there was no evidence from which the jury could have found that appellant, an inmate at the Arkansas Department of Correction, responded with anything other than deadly force because he admitted to stabbing the victim, a correctional officer, with a knife and testified, moreover, that the victim did not advance toward him with his night stick until he had slipped out of his handcuffs and brandished his knife; once appellant threatened him, the officer could lawfully use non-deadly physical force against appellant; thus, the appellate court held that the giving of an instruction on the use of deadly physical force in self defense was not warranted because the evidence did not show that appellant reasonably believed that the officer was using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force. Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court; Fred D. Davis, III, Judge; affirmed. Maxie G. Kizer, P.A., for appellant. Winston Bryant, Att'y Gen., by: Vada Berger, Asst. Att'y Gen., for appellee. James R. Cooper, Judge. *ADVREPCA6* DIVISION I CACR94-971 March 20, 1996 WALTER LEE WALTON APPEAL FROM THE JEFFERSON COUNTY APPELLANT CIRCUIT COURT [NO. CA94-165-3] VS. HON. FRED D. DAVIS, III, CIRCUIT JUDGE STATE OF ARKANSAS AFFIRMED APPELLEE James R. Cooper, Judge. The appellant was convicted in a jury trial of battery in the first degree and sentenced to seven years in the Arkansas Department of Correction. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in failing to give jury instructions AMCI 2d 704 on the use of physical force in defense of a person and AMCI 2d 705 on the use of deadly physical force in defense of a person. We disagree and affirm. The appellant admitted that he had stabbed the victim, Ferbia Allen, a correctional officer at the Tucker Maximum Security Unit. The appellant testified, however, that he was defending himself from unlawful actions of the correctional officers. At the close of the evidence, the appellant proffered the instructions on the justification defenses. The trial court found that the testimony was insufficient to warrant the giving of either instruction. The victim, Sergeant Allen, testified that he had gone to the appellant's cell in punitive isolation on the day of the incident to question the appellant about throwing something on Officer Coleman, a correctional officer under Sergeant Allen's supervision. After going to the appellant's cell, Sergeant Allen discovered that it was flooded and needed to be cleaned. Sergeant Allen testified that he handcuffed the appellant and brought him out of his cell. He further testified that while he and the appellant were standing in the hallway, he heard a noise in the control room and stepped away from the appellant to investigate. The appellant then slipped out of his handcuffs and stabbed Sergeant Allen in the side with a homemade knife or shank. Sergeant Allen testified that the appellant then ran back into his cell, got the broom the porter was using, and began swinging it. Although he had been stabbed, Sergeant Allen managed to kick the appellant's cell door closed. He testified that he was not armed with a night stick at the time of the stabbing. He further testified that he had not had any problems with the appellant prior to the stabbing. The appellant testified that he and the victim had a number of problems prior to the incident. He testified that the victim used abusive language, failed to feed him, failed to give him exercise yard call, and failed to release him from his restraints so that he could use the restroom. The appellant testified that on the day of the incident he was unable to turn the water off in his cell and that Officer Coleman refused to turn it off for him. He stated that he subsequently threw some of his food on Officer Coleman's shirt. The appellant testified that Sergeant Allen eventually came to his cell and turned his water off. The appellant testified that Sergeant Allen handcuffed him and brought him out of the cell and that the two of them stood outside the cell while Officer Coleman was at a nearby control booth. The appellant testified that he and Officer Coleman began to exchange words and that Officer Coleman subsequently came out of the control booth armed with a night stick. The appellant testified that Officer Coleman said, "it's dying time," and raised his night stick. The appellant explained that he then slipped from his handcuffs, raised his knife and told the officers to get away from him. He stated that he stabbed Sergeant Allen when he came toward him because he thought Sergeant Allen was going to hit him with his night stick. The appellant acknowledged, however, that Sergeant Allen did not come toward him with his night stick until he had pulled out his knife. He further testified that he pulled the knife to keep Officer Coleman from hitting him when he came out of the control booth. He testified that he retreated to his cell and used a broom to fight off the advances of the correctional officers. The appellant testified that he was eventually able to close the gate to his cell to prevent the officers from entering. An inmate, Revis Leon Hamilton, testified that he overheard Sergeant Allen threaten to "bust his [appellant's] head the first chance he got." He also testified that the officers were armed with night sticks. Another inmate, Danny Floyd, testified that he was in a cell near the appellant's on the day of the incident. He testified that he witnessed Officer Coleman run out of the control booth with his night stick, heard a scream and then witnessed the officers run back into the control booth. He stated that Sergeant Allen was "holding his gut". AMCI 2d 704 is based on the defense provided by Arkansas Code Annotated 5-2-606 (Repl. 1993) which states: (a) A person is justified in using physical force upon another person to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he may use a degree of force that he reasonably believes to be necessary. However, he may not use deadly physical force except as provided in 5-2-607. Arkansas Code Annotated 5-2-607 provides: (a) A person is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person if he reasonably believes that the other person is: (2) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force. Where the defendant has offered sufficient evidence to raise a question of fact concerning a defense, the instructions must fully and fairly declare the law applicable to that defense. Lair v. State, 19 Ark. App. 172, 718 S.W.2d 467 (1986). However, there is no error in refusing to give a jury instruction where there is no basis in the evidence to support the giving of the instruction. Purifoy v. State, 307 Ark. 482, 822 S.W.2d 374 (1991). Here, we find that the evidence does not warrant the giving of either instruction. The instruction on the use of physical force in self defense was not appropriate because there was no evidence from which the jury could have found that the appellant responded with anything other than deadly force since he admitted to stabbing the victim with a knife. Moreover, the appellant testified that the victim did not advance toward him with his night stick until he had slipped out of his handcuffs and brandished his knife. Once the appellant threatened him, Sergeant Allen could lawfully use non-deadly physical force against the appellant. See Ark. Code Ann. 5-2-605(2) (Repl. 1993). Thus, the giving of the instruction on the use of deadly physical force in self defense was not warranted because the evidence did not show that the appellant reasonably believed that Sergeant Allen was using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force. Affirmed. Pittman and Rogers, JJ., agreevvvvvvvv

 

[mareca0301]

WHEN is there justice? Why do these prisoners have the right to appeal what has already proven to be justice? They give him__WW-- the rights to access law books, counsel, etc..his innocence. What justifies MURDER?? Do not let him win, Do not let his brother, sister, and his brother's girfriend bluff you. Grand parents, mom and dad,siblings, neices and nephews, both sides of aunts, uncles and friends--a LARGE community of loved ones who STAND with you and for you.. WE WILL GET JUSTICE FOR YOU. We love you..

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

Please don't forget my child

Hi Jeremysmom...I will not forget Jeremy either. Thank you so much for sharing him with us here. It sounds like he was a wonderful son...both he and you were blessed to have each other. (((Hugs)))