Jonathen Jarrells

Case record

Jonathen Jarrells was convicted by a Walker County jury of murder, armed robbery and aggravated assault. He was sentenced to death.

Background

Gertie E. Elrod and her sister Lorraine Elrod lived together in Chattoogaville across the road from the defendant’s brother and his family.

Jarrells arrived from West Virginia to visit his brother.

The offence

On August 24, 1987, Jarrells attacked Gertie Elrod and Lorraine Elrod in their home.

Lorraine Elrod testified that she talked to Jarrells when he came over with two of his brother’s children to borrow some water.

Lorraine Elrod testified that on the afternoon of August 27, Jarrells came over by himself and asked to use the phone. She testified that she let him in and returned to her chores while he used the telephone.

Lorraine Elrod testified that when she looked up, he was armed with a pair of scissors, and her sister was backed against a chair with a stunned look on her face. Lorraine Elrod testified that after telling the sisters he was going to rob them, Jarrells stabbed them.

Jarrells forced the sisters into a bedroom, tied their hands and feet with electrical cords, and beat them with a clothing iron.

Jarrells searched the house for items of value, returning from time to time to check on his captives, and then he left. Lorraine Elrod did not remember how long he stayed.

Victims and injuries

Lorraine Elrod survived the attack, but she lost the sight in one eye and her hearing in one ear. She had permanent injuries, including loss of sight in one eye, loss of hearing in one ear, and missing and broken teeth.

The doctor who treated Lorraine Elrod testified that she appeared to have been struck on the head at least a dozen times. The doctor testified that she had broken teeth, a broken nose, multiple broken facial bones and lacerations all over her face and head.

Gertie Elrod died from “blunt force trauma to the head.”

Discovery and arrest

He left Chattoogaville about the time the victims were discovered. Based on information furnished by Lorraine Elrod and by the defendant’s sister-in-law, Jarrells was located and arrested that afternoon in Hazard, Kentucky.

Lorraine Elrod’s nephew discovered the victims the next morning.

The nephew testified:

“I saw Gertie and Lorraine lying on the bed, Lorraine was at the head of it, they were lying crossways, and Gertie was about midways, and there was a lots of blood, just blood all over them, blood all over the bed, more blood than I have ever seen anywhere before . . . Gertie [appeared to be] dead, and Lorraine, she was moving a little . . . and she was trying to talk to us, but her voice was too faint and I couldn't hear, I couldn't understand what she was trying to say.”

When arrested in Hazard, Kentucky, Jarrells had items belonging to the Elrod sisters in his possession.

Numerous items belonging to the Elrod sisters were recovered from his vehicle.

Trial

The trial took place in Walker County.

At a pretrial conference in December of 1987, the trial court stated for the record that one of the defendant’s two attorneys was a former assistant district attorney; that he expected to campaign for the office of District Attorney in 1988; and that he wanted the trial of the case completed before summer so that it would not interfere with his campaign. The court stated that it expected a trial in the spring, and asked the defendant if he wished “to proceed with” his present attorneys.

Jarrells contended the trial court erred when it refused to grant his attorney’s request for a “few seconds” to consult with his client before he answered the question. However, the appellate discussion stated that Jarrells had ample opportunity to consult with his attorney afterward and was not foreclosed by his answer from raising the issue later. It stated there was no possibility of prejudice, and no reversible error.

Sentencing

Jarrells was sentenced to death for murder on March 5, 1988.

The jury found as statutory aggravating circumstances:

1. The offense of murder was committed while the defendant was engaged in the commission of another capital felony: “. . . armed robbery.”
2. The defendant committed the offense of murder for himself or another, for the purpose of receiving money or any other thing of monetary value.
3. The offense of murder was outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible, or inhuman, in that it involved: (a) torture (b) depravity of mind (with references to OCGA 17-10-30 (b) (2), (b) (4) and (b) (7).)

The appellate discussion stated that the evidence supported these findings.

It also stated that Jarrells’ death sentence was not imposed under the influence of passion, prejudice or other arbitrary factor, referencing OCGA 17-10-35 (c) (1).

It further stated that similar cases listed in an Appendix supported imposition of a death sentence in this case, referencing OCGA 17-10-35 (c) (3).

Appeals

The case was decided February 8, 1989.

The appellate discussion addressed multiple claims, including:

• constitutional attacks on the Unified Appeal Procedure and Georgia death penalty statutes were without merit;
• the conviction for aggravated assault did not merge into that for armed robbery;
• photographs of the murder victim were admitted without abuse of discretion;
• there was no prosecutorial misconduct relative to the committal hearing;
• the trial court agreed to charge robbery as a lesser included offense of armed robbery, but denied a request to charge theft by taking as a lesser included offense of armed robbery;
• absent a request, the trial court did not err by failing to define torture in its sentencing-phase charge;
• the identification of the defendant by Lorraine Elrod was not impermissibly tainted by an unnecessarily suggestive photographic display;
• because Lorraine Elrod testified at trial and was subject to cross-examination, her previous statements identifying the defendant to investigators were admissible over a hearsay objection;
• attorney fees were not properly in issue on the appeal;
• the defendant raised no issue of mental retardation under OCGA 17-7-131 (a) (3), and the record did not show that he was mentally retarded; it stated that his death sentence was not, by reason of low intelligence, excessive or disproportionate, or otherwise improper under the law;
• it addressed issues involving pretrial conference matters, pretrial interviews, appointment of experts and denial of funds for a metallurgist, examination of arresting Officer Smoot of Kentucky, an in-custody statement about extradition, communications with jurors, and various other procedural and evidentiary claims.

Questions and rulings about evidence and procedure

The appellate discussion included discussion of the state’s questioning of arresting Officer Smoot of Kentucky concerning beer cans found in Jarrells’ pickup. It noted that Jarrells waived rights under Miranda v. Arizona and talked to police, and did not invoke his right to silence when he was taken outside to his vehicle.

The appellate discussion also included discussion of a statement during Officer Smoot’s redirect examination that Jarrells “Refused” when asked whether he had agreed or refused to be extradited. It stated the trial court initially overruled the objection, then later sustained it and instructed the jury to disregard the answer; it stated that the statute was complied with and Jarrells failed to renew his motion for a mistrial after curative instructions.

The appellate discussion included discussion of alternate jurors, stating that the alternates told the jury they agreed with its verdict at the guilt phase but did not discuss sentence, that the court questioned each juror, and that there were no conversations about punishment during the short time the alternates were with the jury.

Appendix of similar cases

Cohen v. State, 257 Ga. 544 (361 SE2d 373) (1987) ; Jefferson v. State, 256 Ga. 821 (353 SE2d 468) (1987) ; Beck v. State, 255 Ga. 483 (340 SE2d 9) (1986) ; Ingram v. State, 253 Ga. 622 (323 SE2d 801) (1984) ; Spivey v. State, 253 Ga. 187 (319 SE2d 420) (1984) ; Roberts v. State, 252 Ga. 227 (314 SE2d 83) (1984) ; Mincey v. State, 251 Ga. 255 (304 SE2d 882) (1983) ; Jones v. State, 249 Ga. 605 (293 SE2d 708) (1982) ; Berryhill v. State, 249 Ga. 442 (291 SE2d 685) (1982) ; Solomon v. State, 247 Ga. 27 (277 SE2d 1) (1981) ; Dick v. State, 246 Ga. 697 (273 SE2d 124) (1980) ; Jones v. State, 243 Ga. 820 (256 SE2d 907) (1979) ; Amadeo v. State, 243 Ga. 627 (255 SE2d 718) (1979) ; Corn v. State, 240 Ga. 130 (240 SE2d 694) (1977) ; Young v. State, 237 Ga. 852 (230 SE2d 287) (1976) ; Pulliam v. State, 236 Ga. 460 (224 SE2d 8) (1976) ; Dobbs v. State, 236 Ga. 427 (224 SE2d 3) (1976) ; Goodwin v. State, 236 Ga. 339 (223 SE2d 703) (1976) ; Mitchell v. State, 234 Ga. 160 (214 SE2d 900) (1975) ; Moore v. State, 233 Ga. 861 (213 SE2d 829) (1975) .

Timeline

• August 24, 1987 — Jarrells arrived from West Virginia to visit his brother and attacked Gertie E. Elrod and Lorraine Elrod in their home; the crime was committed in Chattooga County.
• August 25, 1987 — The defendant was arrested the next day.
• January 19, 1988 — The defendant was indicted.
• February 22, 1988 — The trial began.
• March 5, 1988 — The trial ended; Jarrells was sentenced to death for murder.
• March 22, 1988 — A motion for new trial was filed.
• April 19, 1988 — The motion was amended.
• April 20, 1988 — The motion was heard.
• May 5, 1988 — The motion was denied by an order.
• May 10, 1988 — The order denying the motion was filed.
• June 21, 1988 — The case was docketed in the appellate court.
• September 14, 1988 — Oral arguments were heard.
• February 8, 1989 — The appeal was decided.

Other details

• Jarrells was 40 years old.
• On February 12, 1988, Jarrells’ investigator discovered in a pond personal items including a steel knife belonging to the victims.
• At the last day of voir dire, Jarrells moved for the appointment of a defense metallurgist, supported by an affidavit stating corrosion on items indicated they had been in the water “up to a month.”
• The trial court denied the motion based on evidence that the “pond” filled and drained according to the weather and that the pond was dry in August, when the crime occurred, and thereafter to at least late December.
• Despite the denial of funds, the metallurgist testified for the defense at trial that in his opinion the knife had been immersed “for probably two, three weeks’ time,” and “no more than a month[ ].”
• Trial evidence stated the pond was dry from August until mid-January.
• The appellate discussion stated that the trial court agreed to charge robbery as a lesser included offense of armed robbery, but denied a request to charge theft by taking as a lesser included offense of armed robbery.
• The appellate discussion stated that Jarrells asked for and received $2,000 for the services of an investigator, and that he later contended it was inadequate to pay an investigative bill of some $6,000.
• The appellate discussion noted that attorney fees were not properly in issue on the appeal.
• The appellate discussion addressed that an expert employed by the state crime laboratory was appointed to assist the defense and stated that any issue as to confidentiality was moot absent a showing that the expert divulged information to the state.
• The appellate discussion stated that the identification by Lorraine Elrod was admitted and that her previous statements were admissible over a hearsay objection.
• David L. Lomenick, Jr., was listed as District Attorney; Michael J. Bowers was listed as Attorney General; Paula K. Smith was listed as Assistant Attorney General for the appellee.
• Roland L. Enloe, Jr., Samuel C. Finster, Sr., and Frank B. Perry were listed for appellant.