The Akron Legal News

Death sentence upheld for man who murdered gas station clerk

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: April 28, 2016

Last week, the Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the death sentence of a Toledo man who shot a gas station clerk.

Anthony Belton appealed from the judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas where he was sentenced to death on a no contest plea to the 2008 aggravated murder of Matthew Dugan.

According to case background, on Aug. 13, 2008, 34-year-old Dugan was working the night shift at a BP service station when a man entered wearing a dark, hooded jacket.

The man left the store multiple times when other patrons entered.

At 7 a.m., the hooded man entered the store one last time, selected two drinks and approached the cashier.

Surveillance video showed Dugan turn his back and then turn back around to find the hooded man pointing a handgun at him. Dugan jumped back and raised his hands, handed money over to the gunman and retrieved phone cards for the robber.

In the video, the robber then gestured towards something behind Dugan who turned around.

At that point, the gunman leaned over the counter, raised the gun and shot at the back of Dugan’s head.

Belton was eventually apprehended and identified as the shooter but not before he went to a shopping mall.

When the police took him into custody, Belton requested that they retrieve his new shoes from his vehicle along with corresponding receipts.

Although Belton denied his involvement in the murder initially, he eventually confessed and then entered no contest pleas to the aggravated murder and aggravated robbery charges against him, which included firearm specifications.

A three-judge panel accepted the plea, reviewed the evidence and sentenced Belton to death.

On appeal to the state’s Supreme Court, Belton raised 20 assignments of error, none of which found favor with the reviewing court.

Belton first argued that the death penalty in Ohio was effectively repealed in 2011.

“Belton has not met the heavy burden required to establish that the General Assembly implicitly repealed the death penalty in 2011,” Justice Sharon Kennedy wrote on behalf of the high court.

In another appellate claim, Belton contended that Ohio law violates his constitutional right to have a jury determine both his guilt and his sentence after a plea of no contest.

Again, the Supreme Court found no such thing.

“In most cases, a defendant’s plea of no contest or guilty to a felony amounts to a waiver of trial, meaning that the state need not present evidence of guilt,” Kennedy wrote. “In a capital case, a three-judge panel must examine witnesses, hear any other evidence properly presented by the prosecution and unanimously determine whether the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of aggravated murder or of a lesser offense.”

Under Ohio’s statutory scheme, the Supreme Court held that, when a defendant enters a no contest plea in a capital case, a three-judge panel determines both guilt and an appropriate sentence.

Kennedy wrote that Belton was properly prosecuted under the law and that “Ohio law does not permit a jury to sentence a capital defendant if the defendant has elected to enter a plea of guilty or no contest to capital charges.”

Among Belton’s other assignments of error was a challenge to the state’s lethal injection protocol which he claimed was cruel and unusual punishment. The Supreme Court found otherwise, citing court precedent.

Belton also challenged the admission of his confession, fingerprint evidence, the prosecutor’s conduct and the weight of the evidence.

In each instance, the high court rejected his claims and concluded by ruling that, although the mitigating evidence was “significant,” it did not outweigh the aggravating circumstances of the case.

“Belton shot Dugan at close range, in the back of the head, even though Dugan had cooperated with Belton’s demands for money and phone cards,” Kennedy wrote. “Belton then left Dugan to die and went shoe shopping.”

Kennedy concluded by writing that the death penalty was appropriate and proportional in Belton’s case.

Justice William O’Neill was the sole justice to dissent based on his opposition to the death penalty.

The case is cited Sate. V. Belton, Slip Opinion No. 2016-Ohio-1581.

[Back]