In 1998, Don Collins, at the age of 13, decided to tie Robert Middleton, an 8 year old neighbor of his, to a tree, pour gasoline on him and set him on fire. Middleton survived his burns covering 99% of his body. He later contracted skin cancer, as a result of the burns he received and died from the cancer in 2011, 13 years after the burning.
It is unclear but from the article it sounds as if Collins has been under juvenile custody for the last 16 years pending the outcome of his case. In March of this year the court ruled that Collins could be tried as an adult for murder. Collins has been locked up in the Montgomery County, TX jail since then.
There are certain legal arguments surrounding this case. The actions leading to Middleton’s death occurred in 1998, when Collins was 13. At that time, in Texas, defendants had to be 14 for their cases to be transferred to adult court. The law was changed in 1999 to lower that age requirement to age 10. Prosecutors argue that since the death occurred in 2011, that is when the murder occurred.
So what is the date of the offense? 1998 or 2011?
Why was Collins in juvenile custody for the last 11 years, after he turned 18?
I personally think he should stand trial for this kid’s horrific ordeal and ultimate death, and face the consequences as an adult.
This line of argument appears absurd on the face of it. The criminality of and punishment for actions is determined based on the law that was in effect at the time of those actions. This is a fundamental principal of our society:
So, the law said that you need to be 14 to be tried as an adult, he was 13, he can’t be.
I’m not a Texas lawyer, but isn’t the usual rule a year and a day? An assault becomes murder if the victim dies from his wounds up to a year and a day after the attack. Does that not apply in Texas?
Most jurisdictions have abolished the year-and-a-day rule, which makes sense because there’s nothing particularly logical about it. In any event, at common law there is nothing that allows a prosecutor to arbitrarily redefine the date of death as the date of the murder. The date of the actus is always what governs, as far as I know.
As to the OP’s question, ISTM that trying a child as an adult is fundamentally inconsistent with the purposes of a juvenile delinquency system. Why bother having it if you ignore it when it’s inconvenient? Either children are criminally culpable, or they aren’t.
The year and a day rule seemed to be tailor made for situations like this. I can’t see how justice is served prosecuting a 16 year old case, where the punishment has already been served.
The Texas AG’s opinion says, without analysis or citation to authority, that the date of the offense may be alleged to be in 2011, since the penal act (murder) was not completed until the victim died in 2011. That runs counter to the common law practice, but perhaps Texas has some statutory guidance we don’t know? pravnik?
They may be thinking to characterize the change as merely procedural, since the law simply governs the move of jurisdiction from juvenile to general court. A law is not ex post facto prohibited if its retroactive change is merely procedural and does not directly alter the elements of the offense or increase the punishment for the offense.
But the Fourth Circuit, at least, doesn’t permit those kind of “fig leaf” justifications. In the Fourth, putatively procedural laws that nonetheless have the effect of retroactively altering the substantive elements of a crime or the applicable punishment thereof are impermissible. No idea what the law is in the Fifth Circuit.
Right: it can’t be merely procedural because it criminalizes conduct that was not previously a crime (legislatures having taken pains to distinguish “delinquency” from “criminal acts”).
Well, from a policy viewpoint it doesn’t make sense that a criminal should receive a sharply reduced sentence merely because his victim hung on (in, say, a vegetative state) for a few extra days, weeks, months or even years.
Of course, the fact that in this particular case the victim apparently recovered, but later developed cancer is a bit unusual.
Weird story, I’m not actually sure what Collins status has been for the past 16 years. It seems like he was never convicted of any crime related to the burning assault on Middleton.
Instead, it sounds like Middleton could not actually identify his attacker when he was attacked. But many years later he testified that Collins sexually assaulted him two weeks prior to the burning attack. Thus I guess the theory is Collins then tried to murder him two weeks later so that Middleton couldn’t tell on him for his sexual assault.
Lot of question marks here, there is no direct evidence linking Collins to the burning crime, and I do not believe he’s ever been convicted of anything relating to it so I doubt he’s been held in juvenile custody on that charge.
However, it does mention Collins is facing charges on a separate matter of failing to register as a sex offender–suggesting Collins maybe has other crimes for which he’s been imprisoned in the interim.
I think there is also a big question mark linking the burns to the cancer.
Good news for Massachusettsans - killers who were sentenced to life in prison without parole for murders committed as [del]teens[/del] children will be getting a shot at early release.
*"A killer whose court victory cleared the way for dozens of lifers convicted as teens to seek freedom is expected to make new demands before a judge today, including giving cons the opportunity to cross-examine anyone who argues against their release.
But Suffolk District Attorney Daniel F. Conley said Gregory Diatchenko — who was 17 in 1981 when he plunged a knife through the face and heart of 55-year-old Thomas Wharf in Kenmore Square while screaming, “Give me your money, you (expletive),” — is asking too much."*
Its to stop the sort of thing that seems to be going on on this case, where I beat you up and then twenty years later you have a heart attack or something.
I get that. It’s just an extremely arbitrary line that doesn’t take into account the nature of the conduct. If I murder by forcefeeding my victim asbestos I am no less culpable than the guy whose victim got a double-tap to the head.
Is that really an issue? In common law states that retain the “year and a day” rule do we have murderers who are doing the Dr. Evil hand gesture while committing slow murders that take their victims two years to die?
I agree that it is arbitrary, but I like the limitation it imposes. None of this “you shot a cop in 1972 when he was 40, and now that he is 82 he died from cancer which may very well have been a result of the bullet so now we will charge you with murder” nonsense.
Indeed. This article about Collins notes that he was convicted of molesting an 8-year-old boy about three years after he was alleged to have burned Middleton.
To my naive legal mind, this case would seem to have potential as SCOTUS material - lots of weighty but novel issues where the resolution is not at all clear.
I agree with Bryan Ekers, no grandstanding involved. A 13 year old who would tie another child to a tree and attempt to burn him to death would best be put down.