DAUPHIN COUNTY, Pa- The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has affirmed a lower court’s ruling that a man convicted of murder in Dauphin County did received a fair trial.
In the federal court system, the circuit court is just one level below the Supreme Court.
The decision ends a long journey of appeals for Vegas Gibson, 35, who shot and killed Jason Green during a fight outside Lawson’s Bar in Steelton in 2004. Gibson pulled a 9mm handgun from his waist and shot Green multiple times in the stomach. He then fled to Mobile, Alabama, where he was arrested by the U.S. Marshal.
Gibson claimed that he was defending himself. A Dauphin County jury rejected his testimony and convicted him of first-degree murder in 2005. The Hon. Lawrence F. Clark, Jr. sentenced him to life in prison.
For years, Gibson pursued appeals and post-conviction relief act (PCRA) actions in state court, none of which led to his release. In 2012, he filed a habeas corpus petition in federal court, alleging that the prosecutor made improper comments and that his own attorney was ineffective. The Hon. Yvette Kane, a U.S. District Court judge, rejected the claim that he received an unfair trial.
Gibson successfully appealed to the Third Circuit, which narrowed the case to three issues.
The first was a comment by the prosecutor that “this is the first time you’ve heard self-defense”, which Gibson argued violated his Fifth Amendment right not to testify.
The second and third were claims that defense counsel had not investigated the criminal background of the victim’s companion – which would have shown Gibson feared for his life – and that Gibson should have been allowed to testify that he knew about the violent propensities of the companion. Earlier, a state appeals court had agreed that Gibson should have been allowed to testify to this knowledge, but observed that the jury had heard other evidence showing the same thing.
The Third Circuit rejected Gibson’s claims.
“We agree that the prosecutor’s comments were an allowable response to Gibson’s conduct at trial and therefore his counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to them.”
The court further found that Gibson’s attorney was not ineffective at trial and affirmed Judge Kane’s rulings. A copy of the Third Circuits’ opinion is attached below.
