Nevada County Picayune and Gurdon Times Newspaper Archive

Dansby Wants Trial In Nevada County

Where will the capital murder trial of Joe Louis Dansby be held?

This is a question which won't be decided until a pre-trial hearing on March 19. The trial, however, will begin April 7, 1997 regardless of the location.

Dansby is being tried for the May 16, 1992, murders of Jeff Lewis, 24, and Malissa Clark, 21.

Eighth Judicial District Circuit-Chancery Judge Joe Griffin told Dansby's attorney, Gene Bramblett, and the district's prosecuting attorneys, Brent Haltom and Danny Rodgers, this during a hearing Wednesday, Feb. 26.

Bramblett argued it was the defendant's constitutional right to have the trial wherever he wanted it.

The state, represented by Haltom and Rodgers, vehemently argued against another change of venue. Rodgers pointed out no motion was made to change the venue on Jan. 8, 1996, when the defense could have done so without delaying the trial date.

He said it wasn't until July 11 when the defendant requested the trial take place in Miller County instead of Nevada County.

At that time, Rodgers said, the state stipulated it would oppose any attempt at changing the venue back to Nevada County.

He said it is the state's contention Dansby can't get a fair trial in Nevada County because of the pre-trial publicity. He added it may prove impossible for the state to pick a jury in Nevada County, which would result in another delay while a jury was picked in Miller County.

This, Rodgers said, could delay the trial another month or two. He called the action nothing more than a delaying tactic by the defense.

Bramblett, however, argued this isn't the case at all. He said it is the defense's belief Dansby can get a fair and impartial trial in Nevada County, adding the case has not received an inordinant amount of publicity.

The publicity it has received, he continued, is deserved because of the nature of the case. "It was a horrible crime," he told the court.

But, he continued, Dansby has changed attorneys, letting his court-appointed barrister, Gene Hale, go, and hiring the Pratt firm of Camden. "We view the case differently," he said. "We're helpless to change what happened before we were hired. He has a Constitutional right to be tried in Nevada County."

Rodgers pointed out Dansby agreed to the initial change of venue, and, in fact, requested it.

Bramblett, though, said his client had never been in a situation such as this before and relied on his attorney for information. "We think it (the trial) should be here," he said, "and we shouldn't be bound by what the other attorney did. He's not trying the case, and it's (having the trial in Miller County) not in Dansby's best interest."

Rodgers informed the court this is not Dansby's first brush with the law, or first felony arrest. He said Dansby had a prior felony battery conviction for beating his wife and children.

Griffin said the court recognized the right to change venue by the defendant and his attorney, but said it was Dansby's previous lawyer who presented the verbal motion last July, with the court agreeing.

He said Dansby nor Hale were forced to make this request at the time.

"The court will not be a puppet to changing the location of the trial," Griffin said. "I am not inclined to do so now, but I recognized his Constitutional rights."

Griffin then gave both sides the chance to state their cases for moving the case back to Nevada County or keeping it in Miller County, telling all barristers involved to find case law supporting their arguments.

"I don't think Constitutional right's extend that far," he said concerning changes of venue when attorneys are changed.

He reminded both sides the court had to make arrangements with three other judges to have a place to hold this particular trial, and this would have to be done again if it is moved to Prescott.

Griffin gave the attorneys until March 19 to present their briefs, but told them he would appreciate them being turned in before this date.

The change of venue issue was only one of motions presented by Bramblett at the hearing.

He also requested Dansby be allowed to visit the crime scenes with his attorneys.

Haltom said motions such as this are usually presented with reasons why given, and none were at this time. "Due to the nature of the crime," Haltom said, "we don't feel it's necessary for Dansby to be there."

He said the crime scenes are open areas and it would be difficult to have proper security for Dansby and the officers.

Bramblett said he expected Dansby to be accompanied by a deputy and could be shackled at the time.

"We'd like to see where the crime was committed and the bodies were found," he said. "This is a necessary part of investigating the murders in reference to Dansby's home and where his family lived. It would help us get a better perspective of what we're dealing with."

Griffin said there are several issues involved with allowing the defendant to go to the crime scene. Dansby, he said, has the right to be protected, but the crime was committed in a remote, rural area, where he could be in danger.

Additionally, the officers would be in danger. Because the crime scene is open, Griffin said, anyone could hide there.

"There are some serious safety concerns," he said, "for everyone. This is a capital murder case involving two people. They had families. This request would create an extreme hazard and I can't grant it."

However, Griffin said officers would be at Bramblett's disposal to go and view the scenes.

Bramblett presented several other motions to the court, but agreed most could be discussed at the March 19 pre-trial hearing and during the trial itself. This includes the constitutionality of the death penalty, a standard motion filed by defense attorneys in capital cases.

There will be a hearing on March 7 to decide whether or not former Nevada County Sheriff Abb Morman had the right to confiscate spent .22 shells allegedly found at Dansby's home on Oct. 19, 1993.

At the time, officers had gone to Dansby's house to take bring him in so DNA samples could be taken.

Bramblett argued Morman had no warrant to search the grounds, or take the spent cartridges at the time, and those shells should be suppressed as evidence in the case. The attorney said he would like to question Morman and others present when this occurred.

Bramblett also requested copies of tapes made the court reporter at previous hearings so they could be examined.

He asked the court to provide copies of the photographs taken at the crime scene, and for Dansby to appear in court from now on in civilian clothes and unrestrained. The court agreed to the last two motions.