The U.S. Supreme Court should deny Eric Matthew Frein’s request to hear his appeal of his death sentence for the 2014 sniper attack that killed one state trooper and injured another, Pike County District Attorney Ray Tonkin says in court papers.
In a 20-page legal brief, Tonkin argues the nation’s highest court does not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Even if the court finds it does, it should deny the petition because evidence clearly shows Frein’s constitutional rights were not violated.
Frein, 36, of Canadensis, Monroe County, was convicted in April 2017 of first-degree murder and other charges and sentenced to death for fatally shooting Cpl. Bryon K. Dickson II of Dunmore and severely wounding Trooper Alex T. Douglass of Olyphant outside the Blooming Grove State Police barracks in Pike County on Sept. 12, 2014. The state Supreme Court upheld Frein’s conviction and death sentence.
Frein’s attorney, Michael Wiseman, recently filed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case, arguing the trial judge allowed too much emotional testimony in the death penalty phase, which unduly influenced the jury. He also argued Frein’s rights were violated when police refused to notify him an attorney arrived at the barracks while he was first being questioned.
In a reply filed this week, Tonkin contends the section of the law Wiseman cites as legal authority to bring the case before the court does not apply, so the court should dismiss the appeal outright.
If the court reviews the merits of the case, Tonkin said testimony in the penalty phase did not violate Frein’s rights because it was within parameters the U.S. Supreme Court set in prior cases dealing with the same issue.
Tonkin said the testimony regarding Dickson related to “who he was as a human being, a husband, father, son, and as a member of the Pennsylvania State Police.”
“This is exactly the type of evidence permitted by this court,” Tonkin said.
As for Frein’s right to counsel, Tonkin cites another U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said a defendant subject to interrogation before charges are filed does not have to be informed that a family member retained an attorney on their behalf.
The Supreme Court takes only a fraction of the cases brought before it each year. The justices will review the filings and issue a ruling at a later date on whether to accept the case.
Contact the writer:
tbesecker@timesshamrock.com;
570-348-9137;
@tmbeseckerTT on Twitter