Dismissal of appeal urged for Simpson co-defendant - News

PRINT THIS Popular

Oct. 17, 2009
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

Dismissal of appeal urged for Simpson co-defendant

By KEN RITTER
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

O.J. Simpson Trial

O.J. Simpson's convicted co-defendant got a fair trial and wasn't a victim of "spillover prejudice" as he alleges in his appeal, a prosecutor told the state Supreme Court on Friday.

"A defendant 'is not entitled to a perfect trial, but only a fair trial,' " wrote Clark County District Attorney David Roger, citing state and federal case law supporting his position that Clarence "C.J." Stewart should remain in prison for his role in a September 2007 armed hotel room heist.

Most Popular Stories

Three suspects arrested in shooting death of police officer

FATAL SHOOTING: Police again mourn comrade

NORM: Biden finds rank has its privileges

NORM: Walton: Coach deserved a punch

Station Casinos posts $455 million third-quarter loss

DEADLY HOME INVASION: Police suspect link to family

Las Vegas police shoot at man fleeing after traffic stop

UNLV sacks football coach Sanford

NORM: CityCenter seeks presidential visit

Suspect in officer slaying leaves hospital, enters jail

Stewart's lawyer, Brent Bryson, did not respond to a message seeking comment.

Bryson still has a chance to answer the district attorney's 46-page response to Stewart's initial request for the court to overturn Stewart's conviction.

The former Simpson golfing buddy claims he should have been tried separately from the football star, whose acquittal in the 1994 slayings of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman in Los Angeles was dubbed the "trial of the century."

Stewart also maintains that evidence was improperly used against him, and that the jury foreman hid a bias toward Simpson until after the pair were convicted and sentenced.

"Only if this court is willing to concede that Simpson's name alone renders a fair trial impossible can Stewart's claim of prejudice warrant consideration," the district attorney said.

"Here, Stewart received a fair trial," Roger said. "All the errors alleged in Stewart's (appeal) are without merit and do not warrant a reversal of Stewart's convictions."

Simpson and Stewart were each found guilty of kidnapping, armed robbery and other charges last year in the armed confrontation with two sports memorabilia dealers in a Palace Station hotel room.

Simpson maintained he was trying to retrieve personal mementoes, family photos and items that had been stolen from him.

Simpson, 62, is serving nine to 33 years at Lovelock Correctional Center, 90 miles northeast of Reno. His appeal is being considered separately.

Stewart, 55, is serving 71/2 to 27 years at Northern Nevada Correctional Center in Carson City. He has lost repeated efforts before, during and after trial to have his case severed from Simpson's.

Share & Save

Leave Your Comment	10 Reader Comments
Terms & Conditions The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor. Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Please enter your name Name: Please enter your email Email: Please enter a comment COMMENTS : (word count limit is 300) You have reached the maximum number of words allowed Current Word Count: Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background. Jay wrote on October 20, 2009 03:47 PM: This man should server as much time or more for being stupid enough to take part in such a ridiculous crime. What did he think because he was with O.J. he could just get away with it? Fair and Balanced Fred wrote on October 17, 2009 03:40 PM: The cons can't lead so they consistently mislead. Because they feel so threatened they concoct lies about birth certificates, death panels, you name it. Because some con finds me so threatening it posts under my handle, a testament to my effectiveness! Thanks for the compliment! Fair and Balanced Fred wrote on October 17, 2009 02:38 PM: Why do I post under my handle? Because I am me. We are the same. OJ deserves a fair trial. Did he get one, maybe. Maybe not. But that is not the issue. The issue is whether the government did all it can for him. He is by perception, and reality, an African American man, presumable not supportive of RepubliCANTS. See, I am witty with my wit. So, handle me this batman. Who is me? Why am I who I might be? Tell the truth. As I may be wont to do oftentimes, but not to RepublicRATS...I am so witty. john wrote on October 17, 2009 01:15 PM: I agree with free nevada,the judge when she read the sentance said she was in the room and could feel the greif the victums felt and the shear horror of the act... what a crock.maybe a couple of years with a chance of parole for good behavior.... Fair and Balanced Fred wrote on October 17, 2009 10:31 AM: Why do the libs post under my handle? Still waiting. Memories wrote on October 17, 2009 09:13 AM: In September 2007, a group of men led by Simpson entered a room at the Palace Station hotel-casino and took sports memorabilia at gunpoint. Bail was set at $125,000, with stipulations that Simpson have no contact with the co-defendants and that he surrender his passport. In January 2008, Simpson was taken into custody in Florida and flown to Las Vegas where he was jailed for allegedly violating the terms of his bail by attempting to contact Clarence "C.J." Stewart, a co-defendant in the trial. District Attorney David Roger of Clark County, provided District Court Judge Jackie Glass with data that Simpson had violated terms of bail. Here is a breakdown of the counts for O.J. Simpson and C.J. Stewart: Count 1 - Conspiracy to Commit a Crime (Gross Misdemeanor) - Guilty Count 2 - Conspiracy to Commit Kidnapping - Guilty Count 3 - Conspiracy to Commit Robbery - Guilty Count 4 - Burglary While in Possession of Deadly Weapon - Guilty Count 5 - First Degree Kidnapping With Use of a Deadly Weapon - Guilty Count 6 - First Degree Kidnapping With Use of a Deadly Weapon - Guilty Count 7 - Robbery With Use of a Deadly Weapon - Guilty Count 8 - Robbery With Use of a Deadly Weapon - Guilty Count 9 - Assault With a Deadly Weapon - Guilty Count 10 - Assault With a Deadly Weapon - Guilty Count 11 - Coercion With Use of a Deadly Weapon - Guilty Count 12 - Coercion With Use of a Deadly Weapon - Guilty Free Nevada wrote on October 17, 2009 08:30 AM: Even people who are pleased OJ is doing hard time (out of concern he may have gotten away with a double murder many years ago) do not believe the charges against him. (Those witnesses and that trial was great, eh?) He deserves punishment but can you believe 33 years --years, not days-- for a first time offender in his 60s facing accusers who say they didn't even feel threatened in some moronic B-movie plot involving a dingy hotel and a box of old cr4p that was clearly mostly stuff that had to have been ripped off from his house, paid witnesses, etc. This is obviously about taking OJ out under the Nevada process that it can put on show trial for publicity or make anyone disappear for any reason simply by intimidating the witnesses into saying what needs to be said. It's up to the Nevada Supreme Court to decide what it wants to be viewed as by the rest of the world --hopefully they toss everything out and take action to ensure something like this can't happen again. Fair and Balanced Fred wrote on October 17, 2009 03:54 AM: Why do the cons post under my handle? Still waiting. Fair and Balanced Fred wrote on October 17, 2009 02:52 AM: I hope he gets his appeal heard. Then all you crackas will see real justice! Fair and Balanced Fred wrote on October 17, 2009 02:49 AM: I'm just waiting, just waiting to see here what I know I will see before too long.