The Tennessee Supreme Court has affirmed the death sentence jurors imposed on a murderer who stabbed his frail 81-year-old victim 27 times and then shook the body to make sure he was dead before fleeing with stolen cash and other items.
Steven James Rollins was convicted of killing bait shop owner John Bussell during a 2001 late-night robbery in the Colonial Heights area of Sullivan County. During questioning by police, Rollins said he and three others had driven to Bussell’s camper-home, located next to his bait shop, with the intent of robbing him.
“The defendant lured the victim from his camper under the pretense of purchasing bait and then attacked the victim while the victim was in a vulnerable position,” Chief Justice William M. Barker wrote in the ruling upholding a Court of Criminal Appeals decision in the case.
Justices E. Riley Anderson, Janice M. Holder and Cornelia A. Clark concurred in the opinion affirming Rollins’ convictions and sentences for the murder and robbery.
In a separate concurring and dissenting opinion, Justice Adolpho A. Birch, Jr., agreed with the majority that Rollins’ convictions should stand, but “as to the sentence of death … I respectfully dissent.”
As in previous dissents, Birch wrote that the method used by the court to review and compare Tennessee capital cases is “flawed” in his view. State law requires the court to conduct comparative proportionality review in each death penalty case to determine whether the sentence is disproportionate to the penalties in similar cases.
Writing for the majority, Barker said the court compared a “pool of similar cases”
and concluded that Rollins’ sentence of death was not disproportionate considering the nature of the crime and the defendant.
“The 37-year-old defendant needed money for drugs and decided to commit a robbery …,” Barker wrote. “The defendant planned the robbery and premeditated the murder to conceal the robbery. The defendant chose as his victim an elderly widower who lived alone and whose health was failing. He knew the victim had a reputation of carrying large sums of cash on his person.”
Bussell, who often returned to his bait shop at night to accommodate customers, was scooping out minnows for Rollins when he was stabbed 27 times. Some of the wounds were defensive, indicating Bussell tried to defend himself, experts testified at Rollins’ trial.
“Making absolutely certain that he had left no witnesses, the defendant shook the victim before leaving the bait shop and then washed his hands and knife in the minnow tank before joining his accomplices in searching for and stealing money and personal items from the victim’s bait shop and camper,” Barker wrote.
In his automatic direct appeal, issues raised by Rollins included the failure of authorities in Sullivan County to record his interrogations.
“The Sullivan County Sheriff’s Department has a policy against electronically recording interrogations,” Barker wrote. “The defendant maintains that such a policy contravenes the heightened due process concerns that apply in capital cases. We disagree.”
Barker said the court rejected a similar claim in another death penalty case, State v. Godsey, saying “the issue of electronically recording custodial interrogations is ‘one more properly directed to the General Assembly.’” Following the Godsey decision, the legislature passed a joint resolution calling for a study of issues relating to electronic recording of custodial interrogations.
“The defendant has failed to present any argument that casts doubt upon the soundness of our holding in Godsey,” Barker wrote.
In the appeal, Rollins also contended that his constitutionally-guaranteed right to an attorney was violated, in part because he was questioned without his lawyer being present.
The court rejected the claim saying authorities repeatedly advised him of his Miranda rights and he had signed a waiver of rights form. His statement to police was read to Rollins, who initialed each page and signed the beginning and end, Barker wrote.
“… The defendant was meticulously informed by the authorities of his right to counsel and of the consequences of failing to exercise that right before he confessed to the murder of John Bussell,” Barker wrote. “On two separate occasions the defendant elected to forgo the assistance of counsel and instead chose to speak directly to law enforcement officials concerning his role in the murder.”
Besides finding issues raised in Rollins’ appeal to be without merit, the court also said the legally-defined aggravating circumstances found by jurors outweighed “relatively weak” mitigating evidence presented by the defense.
“We have considered the entire record in this case and conclude that the sentence of death was not imposed in an arbitrary fashion, that the sentence of death is not excessive or disproportionate, that the evidence supports the jury’s finding of the aggravating circumstances and the jury’s finding that these aggravating circumstances outweigh mitigating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt,” Barker wrote.
The court set a July 26, 2006, execution date for Rollins, who has state and federal appeals remaining.