April 23, 2004

By RACHEL STONE, Beaumont Enterprise

BEAUMONT -- Arguments ended Thursday in a hearing on whether a condemned
killer from Port Arthur is mentally retarded, but the dispute is far from
over.

Lawyers defending Elroy Chester argued last week that the killer, who has
admitted to fatally shooting five people, should be spared lethal
injection under a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court ruling banning execution of the
mentally retarded.

Chester, 33, pleaded guilty to capital murder in 1998 in the killing of
Port Arthur firefighter Willie Ryman III, and a jury took 12 minutes to
give him the death penalty.

Chester also admitted to killing John Henry Sepeda, 78, Etta Mae
Stallings, 87, Cheryl DeLeon, 40, and Albert Bolden Jr., 35, who was his
brother-in-law. The killings, all in the Pear Ridge neighborhood of Port
Arthur, took place during a spree of home burglaries from 1997 to 1998.

Texas has no statute defining mentally retarded and no structure for
dealing with condemned killers deemed as such, so lawyers and judges must
look to previous cases for guidance.

So far, only two cases have made it to the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals. One case uses the American Association on Mental Retardation's
standard definition of mentally retarded: Someone who has an IQ lower than
70, functions poorly in society and who has those qualities before the age
of 18.

Texas' highest criminal appeals court on Wednesday commuted Willie Mack
Modden's death sentence to life in prison. Chester's lawyers argued that
his case is similar to Modden's.

"If anything, Modden's case is weaker than the Chester case," Anchorage,
Alaska-based attorney Jeffrey M. Feldman said.

Modden had IQ scores of 57 and 64, Feldman said. Chester took five IQ
tests throughout his life, with scores ranging from 59 to 77. Modden's
reading, spelling and math skills, like Chester's, were below that of a
third-grader.

Also like Chester, no one classified Modden as mentally retarded when he
was growing up.

Assistant District Attorney Wayln Thompson argued that Chester functioned
well as a criminal, planning crimes ahead of time, adapting to unexpected
changes and avoiding detection. He was a good criminal, Thompson said.

"That doesn't mean he's mentally retarded. It does mean he's mean,"
Thompson said.

But Modden also was an adept criminal, who "artfully avoided" police,
Feldman said.

Criminal District Judge Charles Carver is expected to make a
recommendation on whether Chester is mentally retarded to the Texas Court
of Criminal Appeals this summer.

---

Source : The Beaumont Enterprise

April 23, 2004

Testimony continues in Chester murder trial

By Angela Weaver, Orange Leader

BEAUMONT - Testimony ended Thursday in a hearing to determine if convicted
murder Elroy Chester is mentally retarded and thus, unable to be executed
for his crimes.

Under cross examination by Chester's attorney Jeff Feldman, Dr. Edward
Gripon, the state's expert witness on mental retardation, agreed that
mentally retarded persons are often able to perform the same duties and
are as mobile as non-retarded people, but with limitations.

"Some are even drive and are given licenses, at least in Texas," Gripon
responded.

Chester faces the death penalty for his conviction in the 1998 murder of
Port Arthur firefighter Willie A. Ryman III. Ryman was shot during the
Feb. 6, 1998, break-in of his sister's home in Griffing Park. He was there
to check on his two nieces at around 11 p.m. when he confronted an
intruder sexually assaulting the nieces, police said. Ryman was taken to
St. Mary Hospital where he later died from a gunshot wound.

Chester is also accused of the 1997 deaths of John Henry Sepeda on Sept.
20, Etta Stallings on Nov. 15, Cheryl DeLeon on Nov. 20 and Albert Bolden
Jr., sometime before Dec. 21. Most of the victims were killed in the Pear
Ridge area.

If found mentally retarded, Chester would avoid a death sentence under the
2002 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that to execute mentally retarded
persons constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.

The three-prong criteria for determining mental retardation, set forth by
the American Association of Mental Retardation and the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, are an I.Q. score of less than 70,
a marked deficiency in adaptive functioning and the onset of the first two
criteria by age 18.

Criminal District Judge Charles Carver will ultimately provide a
recommendation to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on the issue of
Chester's mental capacity.

In his closing arguments, Feldman acknowledged the "horrendous nature" of
Chester's crimes, but argued that the defendant's ability to commit them
didn't mean he isn't mentally retarded and charged Judge Carver to stick
to the definitions described in the guidelines.

"Applying anything else would be contrary to law and a reversible
decision," Feldman said.

He continued by reiterating that four of five I.Q. scores given Chester
over his lifetime fell beneath the 70 score required by the DSM and AAMR
and the one test of adaptive functioning Chester was given at age 18 fell
far below the norm.

The state's attorney Wayln Thompson countered in his closing statement
that no authority, whether in school or in prison, had ever labeled
Chester as mentally retarded, but as learning disabled or as a person with
borderline intellectual functioning, which would not fall under the mental
retardation category.

Thompson also disagreed that Chester's adaptive functioning fell below the
norm enough to constitute mental retardation.

"I do not agree that significant deficiencies in adaptive functioning has
been proven to the degree that meets the criteria set forth by the Supreme
Court and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals," he said.

There is no "bright line" score of I.Q. language in other case desicions,
he continued, and stressed that adaptive functioning was "subjective,"
pointing to testimony that scores for that mental process could actually
increase with time. However, no adaptive functioning tests were performed
on Chester since age 18.

Thompson followed the guidelines set forth in another case to close,
asking seven questions used to determine mental capacity, including
whether those close to Chester believed him mentally retarded and treated
him as such? Did Chester formulate plans and carry them out or was he
impulsive? Was Chester a leader or a follower? Is his conduct rational,
whether socially acceptable or not? Does he respond coherently and on
point, or do his responses to questions wander from subject to subject?
Can Chester hide facts or lie to protect himself or others? Did his crimes
require forethought, planning and complex execution of purpose?

Thompson answered those questions by referring to Chester's history, that
those in authority found him learning disabled rather than mentally
retarded, that he carefully planned out his crimes and took precautions to
avoid detection and was capable, and did, respond to more than seven hours
of examination by the defense and prosecution's mental health experts
without losing concentration and by staying "on topic" throughout.

Judge Carver is giving the court reporter until May 28 to provide a
transcript of the proceedings to the defense and the state's attorney.
After receiving the record, both sides will have 30 days to provide
proposed findings of fact to Carver, at which time he will make a
recommendation.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals will review the case and make a final
ruling on Chester's mental capacity. If found mentally retarded, his
sentence will be commuted to life in prison. However, if found not
mentally retarded, his attorneys will file the case in federal court and
the process begins anew.

---

Source : The Orange Leader