| PETITION FOR EXECUTIVE COMMUTATION
: OF A SENTENCE OF DEATH
Submitted to The Honorable L. Douglas Wilder,
Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia,
On Behalf of Wilbert Lee Evans,
A Prisoner on Death Row
Counsel for Petitioner:
Jonathan Shapiro
Jonathan Shapiro & Assoc., P.C.
1013 Princess Street
Alexandria, Virginia 22314
* (703) 684-1700
. Arthur F. Mathews ~
| Thomas F. Connell
J Mark D. Cahn
, Wilmer, Cutler and Pickering
i 2445 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037
(202) 663-6300
July 27, 1990
,
- PETITION FOR EXECUTIVE COMMUTATION
OF A SENTENCE OF DEATH
Pursuant to Article V, § 12 of the Constitution
of Virginia, Wilbert Lee Evans, a prisoner awaiting execution
in the Commonwealth of Virginia, hereby petitions the
Honorable L. Douglas Wilder, Governor of the Commonwealth, to
commute his death sentence to one of life imprisonment.
Mr. Evans was sentenced to death in March 1984,
based upon a jury finding that he posed a threat of future danger
to society. In May 1984 -- two months after Mr. Evans’ capital
sentence was handed down -- a series of extraordinary events
eccurred that cast serious doubt upon the validity of the jury’s
prediction of future dangerousness. On May 31, 1984, a massive
prison break occurred at the Mecklenburg Correctional Center, in
which fourteen prison employees were taken hostage by a group of
six heavily armed escapees. Mr. Evans, who was housed at
Mecklenburg death row at the time, not only refused to
: participate in the escape, but has been credited by guards and
prison officials with saving and protecting the lives of the
fourteen hostages taken during the ordeal, and with preventing
the rape of two prison nurses. Because these events occurred
after Mr. Evans had been sentenced to death, no court or jury
considered them in determining whether he should live or die.
‘am mw = ow oe a
As set forth in greater detail herein, this petition
raises several -compelling grounds for granting executive
clemency. The first focuses on the direct impact of Mr. Evans’
actions during the 1984 escape, and his efforts to protect the
lives and welfare of the hostages taken during the Mecklenburg
break. As far as we know, Evans’ clemency petition is entirely
unprecedented, in that it includes sworn statements and letters
from prison guards and officials -- including several guards who
were taken hostage during the May 31, 1984 crisis -- who urge the
Governor to reward Evans’ selfless and courageous acts during the
1984 break by commuting his sentence to life imprisonment. As
Toni V. Bair, the past warden of the Mecklenburg Correctional
Center, concluded in a November 1989 letter, Evans "did in fact
assist staff during that hostage situation to ensure that no one
was physically hurt, to include that the female nurse was not
sexually assaulted." Exhibit 3.
Second, this petition presents a compelling institutional
basis for granting executive clemency. As Mr. Bair noted in his ©
letter, a grant of clemency by the Governor in recognition of Mr.
Evans’ assistance to the guards and nurses may well have a
"positive effect on future inmate behavior in the eventuality of
a riot or serious hostage situation." Exhibit 3. Similarly,
Bishop Walter F. Sullivan, the Bishop of Richmond, observes in a
letter filed in support of this petition that commutation of
Evans’ death sentence would permit the Commonwealth to "continue
ee
to punish the crime," while at the same time "send a clear
message throughout the corrections system that efforts at
rehabilitation and positive contributions to society are
recognized and valued." Exhibit 4.
Finally, this petition demonstrates that Evans’ conduct
during the 1984 escape was not an aberration. As reflected ina
letter from Mr. Evans that he submits with this clemency request,
the petitioner has sought to spend his nine years at Mecklenburg
in a peaceful and constructive manner, devoting himself to study
and self-betterment. This fact is no better demonstrated than in
the numerous affidavits from prison officials that accompany this
petition. These prison employees -- who are and will be in daily
contact with Evans -- each attest that the petitioner does not
pose a danger to prison personnel, and that he could, in their
opinion, serve a life sentence without incident.
if
- PERT RI
1. Evans’ Conviction and Sentencings
Wilbert Evans was convicted of capital murder in April
1981 for the shooting death of William Truesdale, an Alexandria
Deputy Sheriff. The shooting occurred as Evans was being
returned to the city jail after a court appearance and as he
struggled with the deputy in an attempt to escape. It was the
Commonwealth’s theory at trial that Evans had planned the escape
and that he purposefully shot the deputy. Evans has always
insisted that he never intended to shoot the deputy, but that the
gun fired during the struggle as he attempted to position it to
shoot the handcuffs off his wrist.
Though Evans’ case was tried to the jury on both prongs
of Virginia’s death penalty statute -- that is, that the crime
was wanton and vile, and that Evans presented a threat of future
danger -- the jury that imposed the death sentence specifically
rejected the wanton and vileness grounds. Evans received the
death sentence solely because of the jurors’ belief that he posed
a threat of danger in the future.
In April 1982, shortly before his scheduled execution,
Evans obtained new counsel, who discovered that serious
constitutional error had been committed at the sentencing
-4-
|
ee ee 2 Se we mee we wee owe wel ee el eee
hearing. Most of the prior "convictions" that the Commonwealth
had introduced -at Evans’ April 1981 capital sentencing, in order
to establish his future dangerousness, either were not
convictions at all, or could not lawfully have been placed before
the jury.
Virginia law, at that time, prohibited capital
resentencing if a capital defendant’s sentence was later set
aside. However, while Evans was pursuing his claims of
constitutional error, the Virginia legislature amended the
Commonwealth’s capital sentencing statute to permit, for the
first time, capital resentericing. Two weeks after the new
sentencing amendment was adopted, the Commonwealth confessed
error in Evans’ case, admitting that the evidence introduced at
Evans’ April 1981 sentencing hearing was "‘’seriously misleading’
or ‘otherwise defective./"!
Because this confession of error came after the new
sentencing amendment had been enacted, Evans did not receive the
automatic sentence of life imprisonment that would have been
available under the earlier law. Instead, the court vacated
Evans’ 1981 death sentence, but ordered a resentencing under the
new law. On March 4, 1984, Evans was resentenced to death.
uv These errors are discussed at greater length in an
opinion of the Virginia Supreme Court. See Evans v.
Commonwealth, 323 S.E.2d 114, 117 (Va. 1984).
-5-
For six years, Evans has challenged the constitutionality
of his resentericing under the revised statute, arguing that the
due process, equal protection and ex post facto clauses of the
United States Constitution required that his case be governed by
the earlier sentencing statute. The Virginia Supreme Court
admonished the Commonwealth for the "indifferent, careless
manner" in which false evidence was introduced at Evans’ initial
sentencing; the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals acknowledged
that, under the law in place at the time of Evans’ initial
sentencing, "if the Commonwealth failed. to secure a valid death
sentence due to errors in the sentencing process it was
foreclosed from seeking capital resentencing and the defendant
received an automatic sentence of life imprisonment;"? and two
Justices of the United States Supreme Court agreed with Evans
that the resentencing was unconstitutional.” See Exhibit 1.
However, in the final analysis, the courts have upheld the
constitutionality of sentencing Evans under the new statute.
Despite this careful judicial review, one aspect of the
1984 resentencing -- the jury’s prediction that Evans posed a
y Evans _v. Commonwealth, 323 S.E.2d 114, 120 (1984). _
¥ Evans v. Thompson, 881 F.2d 117, 119 (4th Cir. 1989).
¥ See Evans v. Virginia, 471 U.S. 1025, 1025-29 (1985)
(Opinion of Marshall, J., dissenting).
-6e
threat of future danger -- has escaped judicial scrutiny.! No
court or other -authority has had the opportunity to review the
propriety of Evans’ death sentence in light of the events that
occurred after his sentence was imposed. It remains for the
Governor, under the mandate of Virginia’s Constitution, to
determine whether the extraordinary events post-dating Evans’
death sentence -- events that Evans’ sentencing jury obviously
could neither predict nor consider -- dispel its finding of
future dangerousness. It remains for the Governor to determine
whether justice demands that this man be put to death by the
Commonwealth.
2. The Mecklenburg Escape
After his original sentence of death was imposed in 1981,
Evans maintained a strong prison record. At his 1984
resentencing, numerous guards and other prison officials
testified to the fact that Evans was well-behaved, hard working
and cooperative, that he always did what he was told, got good
¥ On June 26, 1990, Evans filed a series of petitions with’
the Circuit court for the City of Alexandria seeking, inter alia,
to have the appropriateness of his capital sentence reviewed in ,
light of his conduct during the Mecklenburg uprising in May 1984.
The Commonwealth has responded by asserting that Evans’ claims
are not judicially cognizable, and that the facts regarding
Evans’ conduct during the Mecklenburg break are "clearly the
subject matter only for a clemency petition." Commonwealth’s
Brief at 8.
performance ratings, and caused no trouble. According to
Sergeant C.0. Gibbs, Evans was “extremely cooperative."
Supervisor Booker T. Simmons similarly testified that Evans’
attendance [at work] was wonderful... He’d get
the job done and he ma({de}] good decisions, and he
had a very, very good attitude. And he kept the
place clean and we didn’t have [any] problem. If
you asked him to do something, he would do it all
the time.
Similarly, numerous affidavits were prepared by friends and
character witnesses on Mr. Evans’ behalf. See Exhibit 2.
Despite this testimony, the jury found that Evans posed a threat
of future dangerousness, and the court imposed a sentence of
death.
Unfortunately, the 1984 resentencing jury was presented
with an incomplete portrait of the defendant. Events occurring
after the sentencing hearing, and thus never put before the jury,
dramatically call into question its finding that Evans should be
put to death because he constitutes a danger to others if he
remains incarcerated.
On May 31, 1984, a group of six inmates, armed with
homemade knives, orchestrated an escape from death row at the
# These included Sergeant C.0. Gibbs, Officer Clyde E.
Hubbard, Supervisor Carlyle Dabney, Food Services Supervisor
Booker T. Simmons, Sergeant Claude P. Williams, Officer Harry
Azell, Sergeant Raney, and Capt. Howard Coles. The testimony
given by these men is attached as Exhibits 21-28.
= 8 =
ha way aE ED
Mecklenburg Correctional Center. During the course of the break,
twelve prison guards and two female nurses were seized and taken
hostage. The guards were stripped of their weapons and clothes,
bound and blindfolded; one nurse was stripped of her clothes as
well, and bound to an inmate’s bed. The rioting prisoners
threatened to injure or kill the captured guards, and threatened
to rape the two nurses.
Evans, who was in custody at the Mecklenburg facility at
the time, was not a participant in the escape, nor was he in any
way connected with the escapees. Faced with the sudden, violent
and explosive events of the break, Evans did not merely resist
the temptation to assist -- or even join -- the escapees. To the
contrary, though unarmed himself, Evans placed himself between
the heavily armed escapees and the hostages, urged the escapees
to remain calm and non-violent, and convinced the escapees to
spare the lives of the hostages.
It has taken counsel literally years to piece together
the information we now present concerning Evans’ conduct during
the May 1984 prison break. In fact, it was only through the
recent cooperation of the Department of Corrections that counsel
finally was able to interview several of the few hostages who
still work at Mecklenburg.” These interviews, many of which
y Others are nowhere to be found; still others are
unwilling to recount the traumatic experience of being held
hostage on death row. See Exhibit 16.
-9-
have been reduced to affidavits attached hereto as Exhibits 5 -
12, establish, -above all else, that the hostages credit Evans
with saving their lives and preventing the rape of the nurses.
The interviews further establish that those individuals who have
daily contact with Evans -- ranging from counselors and
correctional officers, to senior Sergeants and Lieutenants in the
prison -- consider him unigue among the inmates on Virginia’s
death row, an individual who has consistently helped to prevent
harm from coming to the guards, who treats them all with a high
degree of respect, and who (unlike other inmates on death row)
could, in their opinion, serve a life sentence without incident.
Universally, these declarations support the conclusion that
Evans’ selfless and extraordinary acts of May 1984 belie the
finding that Evans poses a threat of future danger:
1. Officer Harold Crutchfield, a correctional officer,
was taken hostage during the escape on May 31, 1984. Officer
Crutchfield stated, in unequivocal terms, that Evans was
instrumental in aiding and assisting the nurses and officers.
For instance, Officer Crutchfield overheard Evans assisting Nurse
Boyd, who had been taken hostage, and imploring the escapees not
to hurt any of the hostages. As Officer Crutchfield stated in
his sworn declaration, "(i]t is . . . my firm belief that if
Evans had not been present during the escape, things may have
blown up and people may have been harmed." Crutchfield Decl. at
4 7. Moreover, Officer Crutchfield affirmed that Evans was not
-10-
=
in any way associated with the escapees, asserting that "{i]t is
my firm belief; based on my knowledge of Evans and on what I
observed on the day of the break-out, that Evans was not part of
the escape and, to the contrary, was doing what he could to aid
the hostages." Crutchfield Decl. at ¢ 6. Officer Crutchfield
further attested that, in his opinion, Evans “poses no risk of
harm to any correctional officer . . . [unlike] some inmates who
are a clear danger to the officers." Crutchfield Decl. at q 10.
2. Ricardo Holmes, a correctional officer at Mecklenburg
for five years, was also taken hostage during the prison break.
Mr. Holmes similarly attested to the fact that Evans’ actions in
May 1984 saved his life. "Based on what I saw and heard, it is
my firm opinion that if any of the escaping inmates had tried to
harm us, Evans would have come to our aid." Holmes Decl. at @ 4.
Moreover, Mr. Holmes added: "It is my belief that had it not been
for Evans, I might not be here today." Holmes Decl. at q 4.
3. Officer Prince Thomas, an eleven-year veteran at
Mecklenburg, was also taken hostage during the prison break.
Officer Thomas confirmed that Nurse Ethel Barksdale, one of the
two nurses taken hostage, credited Evans with intervening on her
behalf after one of the escapees had threatened her, and with
preventing her rape. Officer Thomas further confirmed that
Evans’ conduct during the escape was “consistent with his overall
conduct while he has been at Mecklenburg. . . . From my
-i11-
a
experience as a correctional officer of 10 years experience, I
would call Evans a model prisoner." Thomas Decl. at 4 4.
4. Officer Leon Pettus, a 10 year veteran at
Mecklenburg, has known Evans since he was first placed on death
row in 1981. Although not a hostage during the crisis, Officer
Pettus has worked with many of the officers who were taken
hostage during the escape. According to Officer Pettus,
While I was not taken hostage
during the break-out from death row in
1984, I have spoken to three of those
who were. All three stated
unequivocally that had Evans not been
present, things would have been much
worse than they were. . . . It is my
opinion, based upon my experience with
Evans, that he is the kind of man who
would act to prevent harm to a
_ correctional officer. Evans is one of
the best inmates I’ve ever worked with.
He is one of the few who I feel
strongly enough about to put my
thoughts in an affidavit on his behalf.
Pettus Decl. at 4@ 4-5. Officer Pettus further attested that it
was his "belief that if [Evans] were given a life sentence, he
would serve it without incident." Pettus Decl. at q 3.
5. Sergeant James Lindsey, a thirteen-year employee at
Mecklenburg, attested to the fact that he had spoken with several
of the guards taken hostage in May 1984, and that "(t]hese
officers have told me that Evans helped keep things calm during
the break and that Evans helped the officers and nurses who were
-12-
[
being held hostage." Lindsey Decl. at ¢ 4. Sergeant Lindsey
further attested to Evans’ exemplary behavior at Mecklenburg.
Lindsey Decl. at ¢ 2. Indeed, according to Sergeant Lindsey, in
his 13 years at Mecklenburg, Evans was one of only a few inmates
on death row who, in his opinion, "would not pose a threat to
officers or other inmates were he to serve a life sentence."
. Lindsey Decl. at { 5.
6. Lieutenant Marvin Rainey, an eleven-year veteran at
Mecklenburg, similarly attested to the fact that according to the
officers taken hostage in May 1984, "Evans was a calming
influence throughout the night, and was looking out for the
welfare, safety and comfort of the hostages. . . . One hostage
informed me that it was his opinion that one of the nurses who
was taken hostage would have been raped had it not been for
Wilbert Evans ania his actions that evening." Rainey Decl. at
q 3. Based on his experiences and observations over the past
eleven years, Lieutenant Rainey declared that, in his opinion,
“if Evans’ sentence were commuted to life imprisonment, he would
adjust well, and would not pose a threat to officers or other
inmates." Rainey Decl. at @ 4.
7. Edgar Brummell, an employee at Mecklenburg
Correctional Center between 1982 and 1984, spoke directly to
several of the hostages immediately after their release.
According to Mr. Brummell, "the consensus of the group was that
-13-
had it not been for Mr. Evans, they probably would have been
killed." Brummell Decl. at § 3. Additionally, Mr. Brummell
recalled that he was "told that not only had Mr. Evans saved the
lives of these gentlemen, he also was a key element in keeping
another hostage, a nurse, from being raped." Brummell Decl. at
43.
8. Officer Michael Hawkins, a five-year veteran,
similarly stated that Evans was an "exemplary" inmate, "the kind
of inmate who would help an officer in need." Hawkins Decl. at
G4 2. Indeed, Officer Hawkins observed that "Evans is resented by
many of the inmates for the way he treats and respects the
officers at the prison." Hawkins Decl. at q 2.
These sworn statements from the prison guards, officials
and employees are entirely consistent with the contemporaneous
news accounts of the prison break -- all of which credit Evans
with helping prevent the rape of the nurses and injury to the
guards. A report published in the Richmond News Leader on June
4, 1984 quotes extensively from one of the freed hostages, whose
identity was withheld from publication:
“Evans and [Willie Lloyd Turner] kept yelling down
to where they (the escaping inmates) had the nurses,
saying, ‘Ma’am, are you alright? Nurse...are you
alright?’ They pleaded with the escapees to leave them
alone."
-14-
The guard said, "If I am ever allowed to go back on
death row I intend to thank those men. It was the
funniest thing I have ever seen in a way. What I mean
is, I don’t understand why all of them didn’t run."
"I do know I owe my life, as do all the others, to
Evans and Turner. If I had the money, I would hire an
attorney for them and see if they couldn’t be set free.
Maybe they have changed. They (the escaping inmates)
would have killed every damned one of us."
Exhibit 13. A similar report was published in the July 4, 1984
Washington Post, in which Nurse Ethel Barksdale was interviewed.
Nurse Barksdale said she had been ordered to strip by one of the
inmates. According to the Post, "She said she got help from
inmate Wilbert Lee Evans, a death row convict who did not escape
and whom prison officials have credited with saving the lives of
the hostages." Exhibit 14. See also Exhibit 15.
In sum, it was the unanimous view of all the employees
interviewed that Evans acted to prevent violence to the hostages,
and that he could serve a life sentence in prison without
incident. In the words of Edgar Brummell, a former Mecklenburg
employee:
I believe in the death penalty. I have known
all the prisoners executed at Mecklenburg since
Frank Cappola. In my view, Mr. Evans is not that
type of person. Mr. Evans put his life on the
line in May 1984 when he stuck his neck out for
the hostages. It is my view that he deserves some
consideration.
Brummell Aff. at q 5.
-15-
i BSE ee eee ees ee ee ee ee eee
- REASONS IR. ING THIS PETITION
There are strong humanitarian and policy reasons for
recognizing Evans’ selfless acts with the grace of executive
commutation.
First, notwithstanding what brought Evans to death row,
the fact that, while there, he prevented the rape or assault of
two nurses as well as grievous injury or death to several prison
guards is worthy of recognition. This petition requests that
this conduct be given consideration in assessing the
appropriateness of Mr. Evans’ capital sentence.
Second, in light of Mr. Evans’ conduct during the 1984
escape, there is a compelling basis for reconsidering the
propriety of a death sentence based upon a finding that he poses
a "risk of future danger" to society. Far from acting in a
dangerous manner, Evans acted to prevent violence and protect the
vulnerable during an explosive prison crisis. It may be that
Evans’ fate was properly determined by the jury based upon the
information it had at the time. However, it must be seriously
questioned whether the jurors would have imposed the same
sentence had they known that Mr. Evans, during an uprising on
death row, would act to save the lives of fourteen human beings
and to prevent a rape.
- 16 -
a fae Be ee ees eee es
Third, apart from the acts surrounding the escape, the
affidavits included in this petition reflect the belief that
Evans does not pose a risk of future danger, and that he is a
model inmate who could serve a sentence of life imprisonment
without incident.” This confidence in Mr. Evans is a reflection
not only of his conduct during the escape, but also of his unique
and exemplary adjustment to the prison environment at
Mecklenburg. The petitioner grew up in an environment of great
poverty and deprivation; his mother, with whom he was extremely
close, died suddenly when he was six years old, and his father,
soon after Mrs. Evans’ death, became a heavy drinker. One result
of these traumas was that Mr. Evans attended school only until
the age of ten.
During his nine years at Mecklenburg, Mr. Evans has
devoted himself to the studies and pursuits that eluded him as a
u This adjustment is reflected not only in the affidavits
of prison guards, but also in a statement submitted by Mr. Evans’
counselor at Mecklenburg, Patricia O’Halloran, who has worked
with him on a close basis since 1988. During this period, she
has observed these unique qualities in Evans:
As opposed to many other inmates, Evans has
always been polite and courteous with me, and
never impatient as I attempt to help him....
I have never felt threatened by him nor
uncomfortable in his presence. I have every
reason to believe that Evans could continue to
serve time here without any threat to me.
O’Halloran Decl. at § 3-4 (Exhibit 17). See also Exhibit 18.
-17-
youth. The petitioner has spent his free time reading, and
writing poetry -and songs. As Mr. Evans reflects in his letter
that accompanies this petition, his writings have provided him
with both an outlet of expression, as well as an opportunity to
set goals and aspirations for himself. See Exhibit 17. Mr.
Evans attaches to this petition copies of some of his works, as
well as a selection of awards, recognition and correspondence he
has received for the poetry and songs he has written while on
death row. Exhibit 18-19.
Finally, a grant of clemency in Evans’ case would send a
clear message to all of Virginia’s prisoners. Rewarding behavior
of this kind is an incentive to others to keep the peace, and to
continue to obey the rules despite an interminably long sentence
or a sentence of death. It is an incentive to prisoners to
resist upheavals and escapes, and to come to the aid of guards
endangered by violence. Thus, granting Evans a life sentence
would at once be both an act of compassion and an opportunity to
foster order in the prisons. Not only Evans benefits from such
an act. So do the wardens and correctional officers who risk
their lives working in the sometimes dangerous environment of the
correctional system. On the other hand, failing to grant
commutation where it is richly deserved may also send out a
message, one which should not be sent. The message is that once
a sentence of death has been handed down, there is no incentive
to follow the rules or to aid guards in trouble. If there is
-18 -
nn a mm ww Wwe ww ww lee lees le le ll ee
nothing to look forward to but despair and death, there is
nothing to lose by prison violence.
These policy reasons find support from noted experts in
the field of corrections, including Toni Bair, the past warden of
the Mecklenburg Correctional Center and now Regional
Administrator for the Central Region of the Virginia Department
ef Corrections. According to Mr. Bair, if Evans’ sentence were
commuted:
there could be a possible positive effect on
future inmate behavior in the eventuality of a
riot or serious hostage situation. ... If
inmates were aware of Mr. Evans’ commutation
based on his involvement with assisting staff
during the Death Row escape on May 31, 1984, I
believe that they could generalize from this
incident to future situations and might possibly
assist staff for their own purposes during a
similar or like situation.
Exhibit 3.
These compelling grounds for granting clemency were
eloquently summed up by Bishop Sullivan in his letter urging the
Governor to commute Evans’ sentence. As the Bishop observed, by
granting Mr. Evans executive commutation, " Virginia will be able
to reward his constructive (even exemplary) actions while
continuing to punish the crime for which he was originally
sentenced.- You will send a clear message throughout the
-19-
corrections system that efforts at rehabilitation and positive
contributions to society are recognized and valued." Exhibit 4.
Mr. Evans’ petition for clemency is not in any way an
attempt to minimize the suffering caused by the crime which
brought him to death row. Mr. Evans speaks of his great remorse
for the family of Officer Truesdale in his letter that
accompanies this petition, in which he writes: "Even though my
mother pass when I was six years old, and a brother of high blood
pressure when I was 22, and my step mother, also my Father have
pass since I been here on Death Row, my Father as recently as
March of this year, I’m still not able to say that I know the
depth of hardship and hurt that the Truesdale family been
through." Exhibit 17.
The jury that imposed Mr. Evans’ death sentence in 1984
predicted, based on the evidence then available, that he would
pose a threat of future danger if he were to remain incarcerated.
The events of the Mecklenburg break -- documented in the
affidavits attached to this petition -- cast considerable doubt
upon the validity of that finding, and the on the continued
propriety of Evans’ capital sentence. The petitioner asks only
that, in passing on his clemency request, consideration be given
to his conduct during the Mecklenburg escape, and to his efforts
to lead a productive and peaceful life while on death row.
- 20 -
nem ey a ey
= a ee
Mr. Evans respectfully requests that the Governor grant
this request for executive commutation and that, before acting on
this request, the Governor grant counsel an opportunity to appear
and be heard.
Respectfully Submitted,
WILBERT LEE EVANS,
By Counsel
Counsel for Petitioner:
Jonathan Shapiro
Jonathan Shapiro & Assoc., P.C.
1013 Princess Street
Alexandria, Virginia 22314
(703) 684-1700
Arthur F. Mathews
Thomas F. Connell
Mark D. Cahn
Wilmer, Cutler and Pickering
2445 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037
(202) 663-6300
-21-
