Appellate Court Denies Watkins Motion for Relief In His 2009 Conviction of Slaying Craig White

TRENTON – Jesse Watkins, 54, serving 45 years in state prison for the murder of his cousin, Craig White, was the subject of a July 8 state Appellate Court unpublished opinion. The court denied Watkins’ motion for post-conviction relief for his 2009 conviction.
Watkins contended in his petition that his trial counsel and his appellate counsel were ineffective.
“He (Watkins) principally asserts that all of his previous attorneys — including trial counsel, counsel on direct appeal, and PCR counsel in the trial court — were ineffective in various ways,” the court wrote.
The court cited the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution whereby an accused person is assured the effective assistance of legal counsel in his defense. On reviewing Watkins’ claims, the courts “apply a strong presumption that defense counsel rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment.”
“Complaints ‘merely of matters of trial strategy’ will not serve to ground a constitutional claim of inadequacy,” the court added, citing case law.
To his additional claim that his counsel on direct appeal “should have urged additional or different arguments in his favor, we must be mindful of the substantial discretion reposed in appellate counsel to be selective concerning which arguments to present to the appellate panel.”
It further noted that on direct appeal “nonfrivolous issues” requested by the client must be sorted out by his counsel by “winnowing out weaker arguments on appeal and focusing on” the strongest claims and key issues.
Watkins’ first point, that his appellate counsel “should have argued on direct appeal, and his PCR counsel should have likewise advocated, that the trial court prejudicially erred in admitting two hearsay statements made by Robert Mabry, who was deceased as of the time of the trial. Mabry made these respective statements to his mother, Constance Mabry Tyler, and to Detective Blake Moore, who was investigating this case.”
The court stated that the “gist of these conversations was that defendant had given Mabry’s name to the police to lend support to defendant’s false claim that he and Mabry had seen Craig White alive after White’s disappearance in February 1990.
“The trial judge decided to admit Mabry’s hearsay statements in the state’s case over defendant’s objection after conducting a Rule 104 hearing.” That is a hearing for admissible evidence to be determined by the judge.
The court sided with the trial court even though Mabry’s statement was “hearsay,” and it was not made in a testimonial manner, but instead was told to his mother, a “private person” the court noted. It noted that Mabry’s statements to Moore were “most likely testimonial in nature.” While the court found “the detective’s testimony recounting the conversation should not have been admitted over objection because defense counsel had no opportunity to cross-examine Mabry,” it found the statement “inconsequential given the context of this case.”
“It is speculative and unrealistic to assume this cumulative testimony tipped the balance in causing the jury to convict defendant,” the court wrote. “Any error from the duplicative admission of Mabry’s hearsay through the Detective was harmless,” the court added.
The court noted that Watkins did not take the stand (as was his prerogative), “to place before the jury his own hearsay statements without ever subjecting himself to cross-examination.”
“Nor are we persuaded that trial counsel’s alleged failure to follow up on certain topics when cross-examining (Harold (“Jaybird”) Watkins) Jaybird amounted to unconstitutionally deficient performance or caused any significant prejudice,” the court wrote.
Finally, the court stated that 19 issues raised by Watkins in his “pro se” (done by himself) PCR petition…” “were procedurally barred under Rule 3:22-4 (issues not raised in prior proceedings but could have been).”
“The only issues that were not procedurally barred were defendants’ vague claims that his trial counsel should have called additional unspecified witnesses, and that his trial counsel (Christopher Robertson ) “previously worked on the file while [he was] employed by the [Cape May County Prosecutor’s Office].”
The court refused to address those issues, since it classified them “vague allegations and were not developed before the PCR judge.”
Watkins may still file a second petition regarding those claims, “and demonstrating that they have merit.”
“We uphold the court’s dismissal of the rest,” it concluded.
Background
Watkins’ conviction came Feb. 6, 2009 when a jury found him guilty of the murder of his cousin Craig White. He was sentenced May 8, 2009, by Superior Court Judge Raymond Batten to 45 years in state prison. He must serve a minimum of 30 years behind bars.
The case gripped many relatives and friends in Whitesboro and throughout Cape May County. It had been 19 years since the Feb. 23, 1990, disappearance of White, at the time, 18.
Aside from being cousins, the two men were reportedly good friends.
As reported in a Feb. 6, 2009 Herald story by Lauren Suit, “But things between the two turned sour in late 1989 when Watkins reportedly learned of White’s summer affair with Watkins’ long-time girlfriend.”
The day of White’s disappearance, he was seen leaving his Whitesboro home in the 400 block of Washington Avenue in a pickup truck that was driven by Watkins. His body was never found; no murder weapon was recovered and no location of the slaying was determined.
After the courtroom cleared, Vincent Watkins, Craig White’s uncle, told a reporter, “It was all very emotional and a long time coming for closure.
“But there is a lot of mixed emotion. On the one hand there is the conclusion of my nephew’s disappearance that was, in fact, murder. And on the other hand, you have my uncle that had to watch his son be convicted of murder,” Watkins said.
Christopher Robertson, Jesse Watkins’ defense attorney, told the jury in closing arguments that the state had not produced any evidence that his client murdered his cousin.
“The state wants a conviction, but all they have is hearsay,” Robertson said.
Robertson also pointed to the failure of the prosecution to produce a crime scene, DNA, eye witnesses to the slaying or ballistic evidence. Most important, he noted, there was no body.
Notwithstanding, the prosecution, led by Chief Assistant Prosecutor Rob Johnson, had told the jury, in his closing statement, that White did not run away, as Robertson stated.
“Craig White is dead, and he has been dead since Feb. 23, 1990,” said Johnson.
Despite pending charges against White at the time, Johnson pointed to the fact that White had many ties to the area, including his year-old son and all his family.
“Everything he ever owned was left in his room,” Johnson said. “His lights were left on and his music was playing.” Further, said Johnson, he told the family he would be “right back.”
Johnson pointed to another fact, that in all those 19 years, none had ever heard from him, including his son and mother.