Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Shaurn Thomas

Justice went to hell in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania when Shaurn Thomas was wrongfully convicted of murder.

Domingo Martinez was murdered in November 1990 in Philadelphia.

(Amended Petition at ¶ 7.) Based on a tip from an informant, John Stallworth was

charged with first degree murder in connection with Martinez's death after which

he falsely confessed and implicated others, including his brother William

Stallworth, in the murder. (Amended Petition at ¶¶ 8-9, 11.) Thereafter, John

Stallworth agreed to accept a plea to third degree murder in exchange for his

testimony against others allegedly involved in the murder. (Amended Petition at ¶

11.) William Stallworth initially denied that he was involved in the murder;

however, when the police informed him that he could get the same deal as his

brother John if he agreed to testify against others and that John would only get his

deal if Thomas agreed to testify, William claimed he was involved and also

implicated Thomas in the murder. (Amended Petition at ¶¶ 12-13.) Thomas went

on trial for Martinez's murder in December 1994. (Amended Petition at ¶ 14.)

Both John Stallworth and William Stallworth testified that: (1) William and

"Thomas were in a car together at the murder scene on the morning of November

13, 1990;” (2) "three men in another car committed the murder;” and (3) "all six

men involved from both cars fled the scene.” (Amended Petition at ¶ 14.)

"William Stallworth was the only witness to testify that he saw [Thomas] at the

murder scene.” (Amended Petition at ¶ 19.)



After pleading guilty to third degree murder, William Stallworth was

released on parole in January 1999; however, he was later incarcerated for parole

violations. (Amended Petition at ¶ 22.) In September 2011, while being

interviewed at SCI-Retreat by an investigator for the Pennsylvania Innocence

Project, William Stallworth recanted the testimony he had given at Thomas'

December 1994 jury trial. (Amended Petition at ¶ 23.) William Stallworth

informed the investigator that he lied during the trial to benefit himself and his

brother John, that he did not know who murdered Martinez because he was not

involved, and that he had no information regarding Thomas' involvement in the

murder. (Amended Petition at ¶ 23.)



6

Petition at ¶ 42.) The Superior Court's denial was without prejudice to Thomas'

right to raise this issue in a motion in his brief in support of his appeal. (Thomas;

Amended Petition at ¶ 62.)

In support of his request for mandamus relief from this Court, Thomas

alleges that because the Superior Court denied his petition for remand he is left

with no adequate remedy at law to obtain the exculpatory evidence in order to

prove his innocence. (Amended Petition at ¶ 42.) Thomas alleges further that the

Board, as a government agency, "has a duty to provide exculpatory evidence in its

possession to a person accused of a crime” and that, without this evidence, he will

be unable to prevail in his appeal before the Superior Court resulting in him being

forced to spend the remainder of his life incarcerated. (Amended Petition at ¶¶ 43,

60). Thomas, citing the United States Supreme Court's decisions in Pennsylvania

v. Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39 (1987), and Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), alleges

that due process requires that he is entitled to the exculpatory evidence found in the

Board's files, even though the Board is not a prosecuting agency, "where there is a

reasonable likelihood that the evidence would have changed the outcome at trial.”

(Amended Petition at ¶¶ 43-47.) Thus, Thomas seeks an order from this Court

directing the Board to provide him "with all written and oral statements,

recordings, reports, the names of witnesses, and other evidence documenting the

statements of Pennsylvania inmate William Stallworth to officers and/or agents of

the [Board] concerning the November 13, 1990 murder of Domingo Martinez for

which Mr. Stallworth was sentenced and imprisoned.”7 (Amended Petition at ¶

63.)

Defendant as exonerated and was paid $4.1 million in compensation in 2017.