Island County Prosecutor wins big in Alexander case

In an opinion published last week, the Washington State Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a former Oak Harbor man who beat his 21-month old son to death in 1991.

In an opinion published last week, the Washington State Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a former Oak Harbor man who beat his 21-month old son to death in 1991.

It was a big win for Island County Prosecutor Greg Banks, who argued five consolidated cases from King, Pierce, Clark and Island counties last June before the justices. All of the cases were affected by the state Supreme Court’s Andress decision, which resulted in the reversal of 300 felony murder convictions in the state.

But the Island County case against James Alexander was the most complicated and vulnerable, Banks said, which is why he was chosen among the other prosecutors to argue before the Supreme Court. Alexander was the only case in the state in which the defendant was successfully retried on a more serious charge, convicted and handed a longer sentence.

“That would have been a disaster if Alexander was reversed,” Banks said, adding that he was elated by the 8-1 decision.

On July 28, 1991, Alexander got upset at his 21-month-old son, Bryan, because the boy had a mouth full of sunflower seeds. He hit and kicked the boy, then ordered him to his room. Behind closed doors, Alexander continued to beat his son until he was unconscious, and also turned his rage on his 3-year-old stepson, Michael.

Both boys were hospitalized due to their injuries. Bryan was in a coma until he died Aug. 5, 1991.

Alexander, a former Navy man, was convicted of felony murder, as well as felony assault of the other child. He was sentenced to 25 years in prison.

Then in 2002, the state Supreme Court reversed 30 years of established law that allowed prosecutors to charge felony murder based on an underlying felony assault. In other words, the justices ruled that prosecutors could no longer charge a suspect with murder when the suspect intended to commit a felony assault, but they didn’t prove he or she intended to kill the person.

The Andress decision reversed some 300 convictions in the state, including Alexander and two other Island County cases. Many of those cases were settled by pleas to lesser offenses, but the Island County Prosecutor’s Office retried Alexander on homicide by abuse, which is defined as causing the death of a child when there has been a history of assault or torture.

A jury found Alexander guilty and Judge Vickie Churchill sentenced him to 33 years and four months in prison.

Alexander, along with four defendants in other counties, appealed to the Appeals Court, then to Supreme Court. Each contended that under the mandatory joinder rule the new charges must have been joined with the original second degree felony murder charge. It prevents prosecutors from filing a different charge in a second trial, but it has an exception for the “ends of justice.”

Banks argued that the exception does apply because the Andress decision was an extraordinary, unforeseeable event and that justice would not be served by applying the mandatory joinder rule. The Supreme Court agreed in an opinion published Jan. 28.

“What a huge relief,” Banks said in a press release. “We believed we had very strong legal arguments. But, we had to convince the Supreme Court that their own Andress decision was so unusual that it would work an injustice if we were held to court rules and not allowed to retry these killers on different charges.”

Banks said he was pleased that the author of the Andress opinion, Chief Justice Barbara Madsen, also wrote the decision in this case, known as State v. Gamble, et. al.

“This is a turning point for this court,” said Banks. “I think it took great courage and judicial discipline for eight of the justices to examine the impact of their previous decision, and reach the legally correct, and just result.”

Alexander raised other issues as well. His attorney claimed Judge Churchill should have recused herself and that the prosecutor acted vindictively in charging him with a more serious offense. The court also rejected these arguments.

Yet Alexander’s appeal opinions aren’t exhausted. He can file a motion to reconsider with the state Supreme Court or move on to petitioning federal courts.