Nicholas Ingram

Case details

Nicholas Lee Ingram was convicted of the June 3, 1983 malice murder of J.C. Sawyer. During sentencing, the jury found the existence of one statutory aggravating circumstance that the murder was committed while Ingram was engaged in the commission of another capital felony (robbery). The jury sentenced Ingram to death, and the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and sentences.

Ingram was executed in Georgia by electrocution on April 7, 1995.

Timeline

• June 3, 1983 — Ingram robbed and killed J.C. Sawyer during an incident at the Sawyers’ home; Mrs. Sawyer was wounded and survived.
• April 7, 1995 — Ingram was executed by electrocution in Georgia.
• July 12, 1994 — The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit decided Ingram v. Zant.
• April 6, 1995 — The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued a per curiam decision in a civil rights appeal involving Ingram’s motion for a temporary restraining order.
• April 8, 1995 — The execution was described in contemporaneous reporting, with Ingram pronounced dead at 9:15 P.M.

The offence

At approximately 6:30 p.m. on June 3, 1983, a young white man armed with a pearl-handled pistol entered the home of J.C. and Mary Sawyer and demanded the use of their phone. Mrs. Sawyer later identified the defendant as Nicholas Ingram. Ingram stated that he wanted money and the keys to their car.

Ingram fired a shot through the floor of the living room to prove that the gun was not a toy and threatened to blow their heads off if they did not comply with his demands. Mrs. Sawyer gave Ingram $60 and J.C. Sawyer gave him the keys to their blue-and-white Chevrolet pickup truck.

Ingram marched J.C. and Mary Sawyer outside and into the woods which surrounded their home. Using rope and some wire, Ingram tied the Sawyers’ hands behind them and then tied them to a tree. He told Mrs. Sawyer to remember a tattoo that she had noticed on his arm because it was going to get her killed.

As the Sawyers begged for their lives, Ingram continued his threats, saying that he liked to torture people. He took off his shirt, tore it in two, and stuffed the two halves into their mouths. Ingram then shot them both in the head. J.C. Sawyer was killed; Mary Sawyer was only wounded. Mrs. Sawyer fell to the ground and pretended she was dead until she heard the truck drive off. After realizing that her husband was dead, Mrs. Sawyer managed to untie herself and went to a neighbor’s house to call the police.

Ingram was also indicted and convicted for the aggravated assault of J.C. Sawyer’s wife, Mary Sawyer, and the armed robbery of Mary and J.C. Sawyer occurring on June 3, 1983. The trial court sentenced Ingram to twenty years imprisonment for the aggravated assault of Mrs. Sawyer and consecutive life sentences for the armed robbery of Mrs. Sawyer and the decedent.

Investigation and arrest

Earlier that day, Ingram had gone to a pawn shop with his friend Kevin Plummer, in the latter’s car, to sell some automobile wheels and a ring. They then went to see a friend of Ingram’s who worked at a convenience store. Afterwards, Ingram and Plummer drove to Ingram’s father’s house, where Ingram retrieved a pearl-handled .38 revolver.

Ingram told Plummer that he knew where he could get a vehicle that he was going to use to go to California. Ingram directed Plummer to a driveway that led through the woods and up Blackjack Mountain in Cobb County. They drove a short distance up the driveway and stopped. Ingram got out and told Plummer to wait for him. Ingram told Plummer that he might have to pistol-whip them but he was not sure he could shoot them. He walked up the driveway and out of sight. Plummer decided not to wait and drove home.

At around 8 p.m., Ingram showed up at the convenience store he had visited earlier that day. He remained only a few moments, then left, driving a blue-and-white pickup truck. The pickup truck was recovered on Interstate 20 in Mississippi three days later. Inside was a motel receipt from Lincoln, Alabama, dated June 3, 1983. The motel’s portion of the receipt was later obtained and the handwriting on it was identified as Ingram’s.

Ingram stole another car in California and was eventually arrested in Nebraska for DUI. While being questioned about the stolen automobile, Ingram told the police that he could save them some time; that if they would check with Cobb County, Georgia, they would find that he was wanted for two murders. Questioning stopped then, and was resumed by Georgia authorities after they had been contacted and had returned Ingram to Georgia.

Ingram gave Georgia authorities a long statement in which he admitted remembering some of the events of the afternoon of June 3, including being dropped off at the Sawyer driveway, returning to find Plummer gone, getting into a truck and backing out of the driveway. He stated that he woke up the next morning in a shopping center parking lot in Alabama in the truck. He contended that he had blacked out from drinking and could not remember shooting or robbing anyone.

Trial

A jury sitting in Cobb County, Georgia found Nicholas Ingram guilty for the June 3, 1983 malice murder of J.C. Sawyer. During the sentencing phase, the jury found one statutory aggravating circumstance: that the murder was committed while Ingram was engaged in the commission of another capital felony (robbery). The jury sentenced Ingram to death.

During voir dire, defense counsel asked potential jurors whether they believed a person sentenced to death would actually be executed, and whether a person sentenced to life imprisonment would be paroled. Specifically, defense counsel asked the potential jurors if they believed that Ingram would actually be electrocuted if given the death penalty, and if given a life sentence whether he would eventually be released from prison. Based on individual juror responses, defense counsel asked additional questions regarding their beliefs. The appeal decision recounted representative colloquies.

Juror Viney:

• [Defense counsel]: "Okay. Do you think if the defendant in this case is given the death penalty that he will actually be electrocuted?"
• Juror: "No, sir."
• [Defense counsel]: "Why do you say that?"
• Juror: "Just past history."
• [Defense counsel]: "Okay. Do you think if he's given a life sentence that he would eventually be released from prison?"
• Juror: "Yes, sir. Same reason."

Juror Deville:

• [Defense counsel]: "Now, Mr. Deville, if the defendant is given the death penalty in this case, do you think that he will be electrocuted?"
• Juror: "I seriously doubt it."
• Juror: "Well, just the past history of the leniency of the judicial system, the parole system."
• [Defense counsel]: "Do you think if the defendant is given a life sentence that he would eventually be released from prison?"
• Juror: "I think it's very possible."
• Juror: "For the same reason, the track record and history of the judicial and parole system."

During deliberations and after conviction, Ingram argued that jurors would be incapable of meaningful deliberation on punishment and would be prone to impose the death penalty due to beliefs about execution and parole. The Georgia Supreme Court rejected this contention, describing defendant’s argument as previously rejected by Georgia cases.

After sentencing, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit addressed Ingram’s habeas corpus claim that his death sentence was unreliable under the Eighth Amendment because of jurors’ alleged beliefs regarding parole and execution. The court held that Ingram had no right under federal law to a jury that believed he would be executed if sentenced to death and affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief.

The district court instructed the jury that no recommendation for death was proper unless based solely on the evidence received in open court during both phases of the proceedings and unless the recommendation was not influenced by passion, prejudice or any other arbitrary factor, and that the jury was responsible for determining the penalty within the limits prescribed by law. The appellate court presumed jurors followed instructions and based sentencing on the facts introduced at trial and sentencing.

The appellate decision also stated that, over the course of the entire trial including voir dire, no juror expressed a position regarding Ingram’s guilt or a predisposition to vote in favor of death. It further stated that no juror stated or demonstrated that allegedly flawed beliefs regarding parole or the imposition of death would infect their decisional process, and that any potential unreliability was cured by the court’s instructions.

Sentencing

Ingram received a death sentence for the June 3, 1983 malice murder of J.C. Sawyer. The jury found the existence of one statutory aggravating circumstance: that the murder was committed while Ingram was engaged in the commission of another capital felony (robbery).

The trial court sentenced Ingram to twenty years imprisonment for the aggravated assault of Mary Sawyer and consecutive life sentences for the armed robbery of Mary and J.C. Sawyer.

Appeals

Federal habeas corpus

Nicholas Lee Ingram filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 seeking collateral relief from his conviction and sentence of death. In his petition, Ingram raised twenty-seven different challenges. On September 10, 1992, the district court denied relief without conducting an evidentiary hearing. Ingram appealed challenging the district court’s conclusions with respect to six of his claims and the failure to conduct an evidentiary hearing.

On July 12, 1994, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of relief. The appellate court concluded that Ingram had no right to a jury that believed he would be executed if it sentenced him to death and that the alleged misconceptions did not make the death sentence unreliable under the Eighth Amendment.

The court’s per curiam decision stated that capital defendants possess no right under federal law to a jury that imposes a death sentence believing that a sentence of death will result in the defendant’s execution. It concluded that Ingram’s Eighth Amendment claim was not cognizable under the United States Constitution and affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief.

The appellate decision also addressed additional claims raised by Ingram, concluding that each lacked merit:

• the trial judge’s improper remarks regarding a decade of appeals violated the Eighth Amendment;
• the trial court’s burden-shifting charges violated constitutional rights;
• the penalty phase instructions prohibited the jury from individually considering mitigating evidence;
• the trial judge’s law clerk’s acceptance of employment with the district attorney’s office during his capital prosecution denied due process;
• the district court should have granted an evidentiary hearing on a claim that the prosecutor’s failure to disclose a deal with the state's key witness denied him a fair trial.

The court affirmed the district court’s denial of the writ of habeas corpus.

Further federal filing and certiorari denial

The appellate record stated that on February 21, 1995, the United States Supreme Court denied Ingram’s petition for a writ of certiorari. Ingram’s execution was scheduled after that denial.

Civil rights appeal (TRO)

Ingram filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, moving for a temporary restraining order enjoining electrocution.

The district court denied Ingram’s motions:

• On April 4, 1995, the district court denied Ingram’s motion for a TRO to enjoin his execution by electrocution.
• On April 5, 1995, the district court denied Ingram a TRO regarding face-to-face contact with his spiritual advisor and lawyer.

Ingram filed a motion to expedite his appeal and for oral argument. On the morning of April 6, 1995, the appellate court granted an expedited appeal and granted the parties an opportunity to provide additional briefing until noon that day. The appellate court denied the motion for oral argument and affirmed the district court’s denial of the TRO.

The civil rights claims asserted that electrocution constituted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, and that prison policies would deny Ingram face-to-face contact with his spiritual advisor and provide a chaplain not of his faith instead, in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The claims also asserted denial of face-to-face contact with his lawyer during the hours immediately preceding his scheduled execution, in violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments.

The appellate court held it had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) due to the prospect of execution within less than twenty-four hours. It then reviewed for abuse of discretion and held the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the TRO.

Outcome

Ingram was executed by electrocution in Georgia on April 7, 1995.

The appellate and contemporaneous descriptions of the execution included that Ingram was pronounced dead at 9:15 P.M. and that the execution involved a one-day delay after legal proceedings.

The per curiam decisions and contemporaneous reporting described Ingram’s execution schedule, the timing of stays and appeals, and the denial of further appeals, including denial by the United States Supreme Court after the appeals court vacated a stay.

Aftermath and final statements

Ingram refused the offer of the traditional last meal and had his head shaved before the execution.

A handwritten response from Prime Minister John Major to Ann Ingram included the following: "I found your letter very moving and I can imagine the profound distress you must be feeling. But I have concluded, with deepest regret, that there are no proper grounds for the British Government to intervene with the State of Georgia."

In an "open letter to the British people" from death row, Ingram wrote: 'If I die, I hope it is not for nothing. I hope people will see that a ritualistic killing in the electric chair solves nothing."'

Ingram’s lawyer, Mr Clive Stafford Smith, was quoted as saying: "Nicky wasn't very good at speaking. He asked me to make a statement for him. He asked me to say he wasn't the one getting hurt, but his family and the family of the Sawyers. He told me he hoped for something better now, because what had happened in this life had been so sad."

Georgia’s Attorney General Michael Bowers was quoted as saying: "It will be a solemn and grim business not to be taken lightly."

Bowers was also quoted: "Twelve years is long enough. It's way too long. This is way, way too long. This is not justice.

"Think about the victim's wife, who has had to relive this time and time and time again. This case has had over 15 legal reviews . . . someone far smarter than I said that justice delayed is justice denied, and this is a perfect example."

Vicki Gavalas, Georgia’s prison department spokeswoman, was quoted as saying: "The order of the court has been carried out. Nicholas Lee Ingram was pronounced dead at 9.15 pm."