SUMMARY OF RUDOLPH HOLTON'S CASE

Mr. Holton's conviction and sentence of death was based on untruthful testimony by the State's witnesses, suppression of exculpatory evidence, junk science, and a prosecutor who misled the jury. The State's case fell apart in postconviction. Today there is not a shred of evidence linking Mr. Holton to Katrina Graddy's murder. In fact, evidence has developed which indicates that an individual named David Pearson aka "Pine" actually committed the murder.

On the evening of June 22, 1986, Katrina Graddy and her friend Pam went to Nebraska Avenue in order to buy drugs and turn tricks (prostitution). At around midnight, Katrina entered the car of a black male. Pam did not see Katrina again that night. In the early morning hours of June 23, 1986, Katrina Graddy's body was found in an abandoned house on Scott Street. Katrina had been sexually assaulted and her attacker had set the house on fire.

In June, 1986, Rudolph Holton was a drug addict who stole in order to support his habit. His record included several convictions for burglary and drug possession and his only conviction for violence occurred when he fought with another individual over some change in a dice game. Within twenty-four hours of the time the police found Katrina's body, Rudolph Holton was arrested and charged with first-degree murder and related charges.

The state relied on three lay witnesses to convict Rudolph Holton: Johnny Newsome, Carl Schenck and Flemmie Birkins. First, Mr. Newsome testified at trial that he had seen Mr. Holton, with Katrina Graddy, near the crime scene on the night of the murder. However. Mr. Newsome testified in April of 2001 that he lied at Mr. Holton's trial. He said he was afraid that if he didn't point the finger at someone else the police may try to lay the blame on him. Records indicate that Mr. Newsome had been charged with several crimes prior to Mr. Holton's trial. Mr. Newsome lied about his then-pending criminal charges when questioned at trial about receiving favorable treatment in exchange for his testimony. Mr. Newsome also testified, in April 2001, that he was afraid of the police.

On the morning that Katrina's body was found, Carl Schenck, a white man who traveled to Tampa with a hitchhiker he picked up the night before in St. Petersburg, was asleep in his car across the street from the vacant house. Mr. Schenck testified at trial that Mr. Holton resembled the individual he dropped off in the area; he identified Mr. Holton by his "shaving bumps" and "frizzy hair". However, Mr. Schenck testified in April of 2001 that after reviewing the same photograph of Rudolph Holton and a 1986 photograph of the individual known as "Pine," it was "Pine" who more closely resembled the hitchhiker he picked up and dropped off in front of the scene of the murder. Mr. Schenck had not been shown a photograph of "Pine" prior to April, 2001.

At trial, the State also presented a jailhouse informant, Flemmie Birkins, who claimed that Mr. Holton confessed the crime to him while they were together in the county jail. Additionally, Mr. Birkins testified that he received "minor" consideration for the testimony he provided against Mr. Holton. Mr. Birkins informed the jury that he was facing a three-and-one-half to four-and-one-half year sentence for the crimes for which he was charged, but he was getting a sentence of three years. Thus, the jury heard that the jailhouse informant was receiving a six month benefit for his testimony.

However, Mr. Birkins testified in April of 2001 that he lied at Mr. Holton's trial and revealed that Mr. Holton never confessed to killing Ms. Graddy. In fact, a police report in the case reflects that Mr. Holton was not in the jail at the time he was allegedly confessing to Mr. Birkins. Instead, Mr. Holton was providing a statement to the detectives at the police station.

Mr. Birkins explained that he lied in order to gain the favor of the prosecutor and, in exchange, gain favorable sentencing consideration for the charges that were then-pending against him. It was also presented, in April of 2001, that Mr. Birkins was not facing three-and-one-half to four-and-one-half years in prison, as he told the jury, but in fact he was facing nine to twelve years in prison on his charges.

Mr. Birkins was sentenced not long after Rudolph Holton was convicted and sentenced to death. At Mr. Birkins' sentencing, the assistant state attorney who prosecuted Mr. Holton, Joe Episcopo, appeared and asked that the judge depart from the recommended guidelines because of Mr. Birkins' cooperation. Mr. Birkins was released from jail approximately one month after Rudolph Holton was convicted and sentenced to death, and served a five year term on probation.

At trial, the State relied on two pieces of physical evidence: a finger print on a cigarette pack and hairs found on Katrina Graddy's mouth. First, the existence of a cigarette pack with Mr. Holton's fingerprint on it came as no surprise due to the fact that Mr. Holton, like many other addicts, entered the vacant house in order to use drugs. Second, the State presented an FBI agent to testify that three hairs which were found on the victim's mouth could have been Mr. Holton's body hair and that Mr. Holton could not be excluded from being the source of the hairs. The prosecutor argued in his closing argument that the hair could not have been from the victim. This hair evidence, which the State argued linked Mr. Holton to the crime, has since been analyzed using mitochondrial DNA and excludes Mr. Holton as the depositor of the hair. The DNA matched the victim.

At trial, Mr. Holton presented an alibi. Solodon Clemmons testified that on the night of June 23, 1986, Mr. Holton arrived at his rooming house around 10:00 p.m. and went to bed. Mr. Clemmons told the jury that Mr. Holton did not leave during the night and was in bed at 6:00 a.m. the next morning.

Also, Mr. Holton's trial attorney wanted to present the testimony of the victim's friend, Pam. Even though Pam was properly subpoenaed to testify, she failed to appear at the trial. Mr. Holton's trial attorney requested a continuance so that she could secure Pam's presence, but the trial judge denied the request. The judge allowed the jury to hear part of Pam's deposition -- but only the part about Katrina's departing with a man, who was not Mr. Holton, and never returning. The jury did not hear that Pam also had knowledge and testified in her deposition about a rape that occurred in the vacant house about a week before the murder. According to Pam, Katrina identified "Pine," a drug dealer from the neighborhood, as the rapist.

In April of 2001, Mr. Holton presented a police report that was not disclosed to him until March of 2001. This report reflected a "Katrina Grant," with Katrina Graddy's birthdate and living at Katrina Graddy's address, had in fact reported that she had been raped by an individual she knew as "Pine" on June 13, 1986. The police determined who "Pine" was and arrested him. He gave a false name, Donald Smith. His real name was David Pearson. Two complaints were filled out by the police; one for rape and one for obstruction by giving a false name. However, Katrina decided to not prosecute and the charges were dropped. Katrina's step-father confirmed, during a pre-trial deposition, that Katrina told him she was raped by "Pine" and he provided the name "Donald" when the police arrived to investigate.

In April of 2001, Donald Smith testified that about ten days before her death, Katrina Graddy came to him and told him that "Pine" had given his name to the police when he was arrested for raping her. Mr. Smith and Katrina went to confront "Pine" together. A nasty argument occurred and "Pine" made threats toward Katrina.

Mr. Smith also explained to the court that on the day of the homicide, he noticed the house where the body was found was on fire. As he headed in that direction, he saw "Pine" who told him someone had strangled Katrina. When Mr. Smith got to the house, he asked the police who had strangled Katrina. He was immediately questioned about this because no one at the time should have known that there was a woman strangled inside the burning house. Mr. Smith did not disclose the basis for his knowledge, although his name and address were taken for follow up. A police report confirms this occurrence - a police report that was not provided to Mr. Holton's trial attorney.

Moreover, Mr. Smith testified in 2001 that several months later he had a conversation with "Pine." He explained that "Pine" confessed at that time that he had killed Katrina.

After the evidentiary hearing, the State interviewed David Pearson aka "Pine." Mr. Pearson's statement was given under oath to the state attorney and police (Mr. Holton's counsel was not present). Mr. Pearson admitted to the events that occurred on June 13, 1986, even telling the police and prosecutor that he battered Ms. Graddy for stealing his drugs, but he maintained that he did not rape Ms. Graddy but instead engaged in consensual anal sex. Mr. Pearson denied killing Ms. Graddy.

Following the April 2001 evidentiary hearing, published interviews revealed that the trial prosecutor had a change of heart. An 6/26/01 article in the St. Petesburg Times reported, "‘It's a shaky case,’ said defense attorney Joe Episcopo, a former prosecutor who won the conviction against Holton in 1986. ‘It's a problem for them.’" According to a 6/26/01 article in the Tampa Tribune, "Tampa lawyer Joe Episcopo, who prosecuted Holton, said that the informant was the state's strongest witness. ‘Now, even I have second thoughts about this case,’ Episcopo said Monday. According to an 11/03/01 article in the St. Petersburg Times, "Fifteen years later, even Episcopo said he doesn't find the case convincing. DNA tests show that the hair did not come from Holton. The jail informant admitted he lied, and other witnesses changed their stories too."

On November 2, 2001, the lower court granted Mr. Holton a new trial based on the State’’s inadvertent failure to disclose material, exculpatory evidence. On November 13, 2001, the State appealed the lower court’s order. Briefs were submitted to the Florida Supreme Court. On December 12, 2002, Mr. Holton’s case was argued to the Florida Supreme Court. Justice Pariente stated that the case "troubled her" and that it "comes close to one of the strongest cases of potential for actual innocence that [she] had seen". On December 18, 2002, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the order granting Mr. Holton a new trial.

After 16 years on Florida's death row, Mr. Holton is awaiting his new trial or release from prison.