Jeremy Sagastegui

Case overview

Jeremy Sagastegui was convicted of three counts of aggravated first degree murder and was executed by lethal injection in Washington on October 13, 1998.

He pleaded guilty in Benton County Superior Court to three counts of aggravated first degree murder. Following a special sentencing hearing, a jury returned an affirmative answer to the question, “[h]aving in mind the crime of which the defendant has been found guilty, are you convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that there are not sufficient mitigating circumstances to merit leniency?” Clerk's Papers (CP) at 144. The trial court sentenced Sagastegui to death.

Timeline

• November 18, 1995 — Sagastegui agreed to babysit at Sarbacher's home in Finley.
• November 19, 1995 — Deputies found the bodies of Lisa Vera-Acevado and Kievan Sarbacher and found Tiana Sarbacher unharmed.
• November 20, 1995 — Southham observed the black Ranger truck in the apartment parking lot and reported it to the Benton County Sheriff's Office.
• November 21, 1995 — At a preliminary hearing in Benton County Superior Court, Sagastegui indicated he did not want to be represented by legal counsel.
• November 22, 1995 — Sagastegui was formally charged with three counts of aggravated murder in the first degree.
• December 1, 1995 — At arraignment, Sagastegui reiterated his desire to represent himself.
• December 15, 1995 — An omnibus hearing began regarding self-representation.
• December 18, 1995 — The trial court questioned Sagastegui extensively about self-representation; Sagastegui answered “Yes” to continuing to represent himself.
• December 29, 1995 — The State filed a notice of special sentencing procedure indicating it intended to seek the death penalty.
• January 23, 1996 — A confession hearing held pursuant to CrR 3.5 resulted in a ruling that Sagastegui’s confession was voluntary and admissible.
• January 30, 1996 — Trial commenced before the Honorable Carolyn A. Brown.
• February 2, 1996 — Sagastegui pleaded guilty to all three charges.
• February 5, 1996 — The penalty phase commenced.
• February 12, 1996 — A jury returned its verdict on the mitigating-circumstances question.
• March 11, 1996 — The sentencing court considered Sagastegui's request to waive his rights to a general appeal and to the assistance of counsel for any review.
• April 30, 1998 — The Washington Supreme Court decided the case.
• October 13, 1998 — Sagastegui was executed by lethal injection in Washington.

The offence

Sometime between the evening hours of November 18 and the early morning hours of November 19, 1995, at a residence in Finley, Washington, Jeremy Sagastegui sexually abused, beat, stabbed and then drowned Kievan Sarbacher, a three-year-old boy in his care. He then waited for Kievan’s mother, Melissa Sarbacher, to return home. When she returned, Sagastegui shot Melissa Sarbacher and her friend, Lisa Vera-Acevado.

The record later described that later on November 19, 1995, deputies were dispatched to Sarbacher's residence after receiving a call from a neighbor. They found the body of Vera-Acevado lying outside the home. Deputies then went inside and discovered Sarbacher's body on the floor of the living room. In one bedroom, they found two-year-old Tiana Sarbacher standing in a crib; she was unharmed. In the master bedroom, deputies found the lifeless body of three-year-old Kievan lying on a bed. The child, wrapped in a green terry cloth towel, appeared slightly bluish in color and was cold to the touch.

The deputies observed a large bloody butcher knife next to Kievan's body and found a jar of petroleum jelly on the bed. A later examination of Kievan’s corpse with a forensic light disclosed three small droplets on the inner thigh. An examination of the substance in the jar with the forensic light revealed that it luminesced in the same manner as did the droplets discovered on the child's body. Within a bathtub near the master bedroom, investigating deputies found water and toys and found bloodstains on the side of the tub.

Autopsies were performed on all three victims by Dr. Terri Haddix, a forensic pathologist. Dr. Haddix found Kievan had been stabbed in the right side of his abdomen. She observed bruising about the child’s head and three lacerations in Kievan’s anus, producing bleeding. She opined that penetration of “something” into the anal canal would have produced these lacerations. She believed these wounds were of recent origin based on no evidence of healing or inflammation. Dr. Haddix concluded that Kievan’s death was not caused by the injuries but rather by drowning. This conclusion was based on foam within Kievan’s nose and upper airways and expanded appearance of the child’s lungs.

Dr. Haddix concluded that Vera-Acevado’s death was caused by a single gunshot wound to the middle of her chest. Sarbacher had been shot twice: one bullet penetrated her chest and the other entered through her neck and passed through her brain. Dr. Haddix could not determine which wound was suffered first, but opined that either would have been fatal.

Investigation

On November 19, detectives from the Benton County Sheriff’s Office conducted several interviews. One interview was with Sarbacher's friend, Korina Barnett, who told detectives she had seen Sarbacher and Vera-Acevado twice during the evening of November 18. Barnett reported that Sagastegui was baby-sitting Sarbacher’s two children at one point during the evening.

Karen Southham, Vera-Acevado’s cousin, informed detectives that she knew they were looking for Sarbacher’s black Ranger truck. The following day, November 20, Southham observed the Ranger truck in the parking lot of the apartment building where Sagastegui was living and reported the observation to the Benton County Sheriff's Office. On November 20, Scott Peterson, Sagastegui’s roommate, told sheriff’s detectives that Sagastegui had called him on the afternoon of November 18 and asked if he “could bring Melissa's kids over.” CP at 425. Peterson said he declined and that he let Sagastegui into their apartment early on the morning of November 19 and that Sagastegui could still be found at that location.

Benton County detectives obtained a warrant authorizing a search of Sagastegui’s apartment. Sagastegui was at his apartment when detectives arrived to execute the warrant. Detectives advised him of his Miranda rights. Sagastegui indicated he would waive his rights and would talk to detectives. He told them there was a set of keys in his closet and “something under the couch . . . that [they] would be interested in.” RP (2/6/96) at 1002. In response, detectives lifted the couch and found beneath it a “.30/.30” rifle with a brown leather strap. The rifle was later identified as belonging to Wes Boulware, Sarbacher’s friend, who indicated he normally kept the rifle at the residence where Sarbacher was killed. Detectives retrieved a set of keys from Sagastegui’s closet and determined that they fit into the door lock and ignition of the black Ranger truck.

Bullets and bullet fragments recovered from Sarbacher’s home were sent to the Washington Crime Laboratory along with the rifle. Laboratory experts concluded the bullets discovered at the scene had been fired from the rifle. Tests also revealed Sagastegui's fingerprints on the rifle. The crime laboratory concluded that Sagastegui’s fingerprints matched fingerprints found on a lampshade and beer can found at Sarbacher’s residence and on a bathroom wall within the residence.

Sagastegui was taken to the Benton County Sheriff's Office. After readvising him of his constitutional rights, detectives Terry Carlson and Phil Carpenter asked Sagastegui if he had any information about the homicides in Finley. Sagastegui replied that he had killed all three persons whose bodies had been found. He then gave a detailed, tape-recorded statement recounting the events on the night of November 18 and the morning of November 19.

Confession and statements

Sagastegui told detectives he agreed to babysit for Sarbacher on Saturday evening, November 18, at her home in Finley. He said he helped put Sarbacher’s two children, Tiana and Kievan, to bed. Sagastegui described that Kievan woke up later that evening “screaming and yelling” for his mother. CP at 159. Sagastegui said he told Kievan to “shut up” and that when he did not, he “grabbed him and shoved his head into a pillow.” CP at 159.

Sagastegui stated he stabbed Kievan and raped him anally, using a jar of Vaseline, but he said he did not recall which act he committed first. He stated that after stabbing Kievan, he put the child into the bathtub to “make sure he was dead,” and then wrapped Kievan in a towel “so his guts wouldn't spill out all over the place” and threw him onto the bed. CP at 163.

Sagastegui said he then got a rifle from a bedroom, checked whether it was loaded, and became angry while waiting for Sarbacher to come home because she knew he was “nuts already and she asked [him] to babysit these kids.” CP at 164. He admitted his plan was to shoot Sarbacher when she walked through the door. He described pointing the rifle at her and that she walked by as if “like nothing.” CP at 166.

He told detectives the rifle did not work the first time he tried to shoot Sarbacher. He described being “more amazed now than mad” because she did not “like run or something.” CP at 167, 166. He stated he pulled the trigger again and it worked, causing Sarbacher to “fall[ ] back.” CP at 167. When Vera-Acevado entered the doorway, he shot her, causing her to fall backward outside the house. He stated he wished Vera-Acevado had not shown up but that “she was there and she saw me so I shot her.” CP at 167.

Sagastegui said he had to shoot “Melissa [Sarbacher] twice cause she was still alive.” CP at 168. He described Sarbacher as screaming and that there was “terror in that girl's eyes,” but he thought the terror was more from fear of what happened to her kids and that “you [had] to give her credit for that.” CP at 168. He stated that after he shot Sarbacher, he asked her “how it felt” and saw she was already dead. CP at 169. He then asked Vera-Acevado the same question and said that “all she was doing was gurgling.” CP at 169. He told her to “hurry up and die or something.” CP at 169.

Sagastegui told detectives he took the rifle, got into Sarbacher's black Ranger truck, drove to his home, hid the rifle under the couch, and went to bed.

Detectives asked him why he committed the crimes. He responded that Sarbacher was “the worst mother in the world.” CP at 170. He said Kievan had been showing signs of being molested and he was “going to grow up to be a molester . . . and he was a bad kid anyway.” CP at 171. Sagastegui said the child “didn't deserve to die but . . . he had no supervision * . [and] was probably going to grow up to be a murderer.,, CP at 171.

He stated Vera-Acevado’s death was a mistake and that the day after the murders he did not realize what he had done until he “saw it on the news,” maybe because “you want to black out things that are you know are bad.” CP at 172. Sagastegui acknowledged it “was kind of a thrill” to watch Sarbacher die, but said killing “the baby was sick.” CP at 176, 177.

Sagastegui stated, “No, in fact I was[n't] even sexually aroused. I just started ... beating on the kid. I wanted to snap his neck and I kept twisting it and twisting it and he ... throwing him around ... and I'm not even sexually arous[ed]. Then I figured ... maybe I was getting off to this so I tried messing around with him and it wouldn't work ... so ... eventually it did, you know, but ... I don't think, you know, I was out to molest the kid in the first place. I think, you know, it was just ... I don't even know what it was but it was sick. I mean it was a different feeling than what I got from the mother. But the mother ... I actually smiled and I I I think I almost got off on it. CP at 177.”

He added that “it felt . . . good” and that he started “thinking about going . . . to Food Pavilion with the rifle and just start shooting people” but that he “was a little tired so [he] went to bed.” CP at 177.

Near the end of the interview, the detectives asked him if there was anything he wanted to add. Sagastegui said he felt sorry for his mother and wanted detectives to “tell her before she [heard] it on the news.” CP at 179.

Trial

Charges and proceedings

At a preliminary hearing held on November 21, 1995, Sagastegui indicated he did not want to be represented by legal counsel. After questioning Sagastegui about his level of education and familiarity with the legal system, the judge appointed counsel.

On November 22, 1995, the State formally charged Sagastegui with three counts of aggravated murder in the first degree. In count I, the State alleged Sagastegui caused the death of Kievan with premeditated intent, and the alleged aggravating circumstance was that there was more than one victim and the murders were part of a common scheme or plan. In counts II and III, the State alleged Sagastegui premeditatedly caused the deaths of Melissa Sarbacher and Lisa Vera-Acevado, alleging aggravating circumstances that included (1) more than one victim and murders as part of a common scheme or plan and (2) Sagastegui committed the murders to conceal commission of the murder of Kievan.

At his arraignment on December 1, 1995, Sagastegui reiterated his desire to represent himself. Despite concerns raised by the trial court, it allowed him to represent himself and changed the status of defense counsel to “stand-by.”

Oral notice was given at the December 1 hearing that a statutory 30-day period within which the State had to decide whether to seek death penalty commenced. The trial court informed Sagastegui and stand-by counsel that Sagastegui had the right to present mitigating evidence to the prosecutor.

At an omnibus hearing on December 15, 1995, the trial court indicated it would engage in extensive discussion with Sagastegui about self-representation and told him the charges were “big-time charges,” that the prosecution was considering the death penalty, and that he had available “a very experienced criminal defense attorney” who would provide “the best representation possible.” RP (12/15/95) at 9.

At the December 18, 1995 resumed hearing, the judge tried to dissuade Sagastegui from proceeding without counsel, stating: “I must advise you that in my opinion, you would be far better defended by a trained lawyer than by yourself. I think it unwise of you to represent yourself. You are not familiar with the law; you are not familiar with court procedure; you are not familiaf with the rules of evidence. I would strongly urge you not to try to represent yourself.” RP (12/18/95) at 6-7.

The trial court asked: “[I]n light of the penalty that you might suffer if you are found guilty and in light of all the difficulties in representing yourself, is it still your desire to represent yourself and to give up your right to be represented by counsel?” RP (12/18/95) at 7.

Sagastegui answered, “Yes.” RP (12/18/95) at 7. The trial court found that Sagastegui “knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to counsel,” and concluded he could represent himself. RP (12/18/95) at 13.

The court also asked on December 18 if Sagastegui understood he could present mitigating evidence to the prosecutor. Sagastegui responded, “Yeah; I understand what he's asking for.” RP (12/18/95) at 31.

At a December 2, 1995 meeting with the Benton County prosecuting attorney, the prosecutor reminded Sagastegui he could present evidence of mitigating factors. The prosecutor stated Sagastegui indicated he did not intend to present mitigating evidence or seek more time.

On December 29, 1995, the State filed notice of special sentencing procedure to seek death. At that hearing, information was presented that Sagastegui stopped taking prescribed medication (Vasotec for hypertension, Paxil for depression, and Pepcid for gastritis) and exhibited unusual behavior in jail. Sagastegui attempted to plead guilty to all three charges, but the trial judge refused to accept the pleas and ordered determination of competence for entry of pleas, stating: “In view of the serious nature of these charges coupled with the fact that there has been some deserving [sic] reports concerning Mr. Sagastegui's emotional condition while incarcerated here at this facility, it is the Court's opinion it is necessary that we determine whether Mr. Sagastegui is competent to actually enter a plea of guilty to the three charges now pending.” RP (12/29/95) at 8.

The court ordered a mental examination to determine competency to stand trial, represent himself, and enter pleas. Sagastegui objected on grounds the court had previously determined mental competence. The trial court declined to rescind its order based on the new information raising questions regarding competency. Sagastegui underwent a 15-day evaluation at Eastern State Hospital. Based on the hospital’s sanity commission report, the trial court found Sagastegui competent to stand trial. The commission report was sealed at Sagastegui’s request.

Guilty pleas

A confession hearing held on January 23, 1996 under CrR 3.5 ruled that Sagastegui’s confession to Benton County detectives was voluntary and admissible, including the tape recording and transcript. Trial began on January 30, 1996 before the Honorable Carolyn A. Brown.

After jury selection, Sagastegui pleaded guilty to all three charges of aggravated first degree murder. Before accepting the pleas, the trial court reviewed Sagastegui’s statements. A transcript of the recorded statement was included in the record as a factual basis. At the plea hearing, Sagastegui conceded he killed Melissa Sarbacher to conceal commission of Kievan’s murder, and that “the State could prove without a doubt” he killed Lisa VeraAcevado to conceal Kievan’s murder, and that all three killings were intentional, premeditated, and part of a common scheme or plan. RP (2/2/96) at 741.

Sentencing

The penalty phase began February 5, 1996. During opening statements, Sagastegui told the jury he “deserve[d] the death penalty and [he was] not giving any mitigating circumstances.” RP (2/5/96) at 780. He admitted committing the murders and stated, “I liked it. I enjoyed it.” RP (2/5/96) at 779.

The trial court conducted a brief conference in chambers to ensure Sagastegui understood he had the right to present mitigating evidence. The State presented evidence consistent with the facts and connected Sagastegui to the crimes. The tape recording of Sagastegui’s statements to detectives was played and jurors were furnished with a transcript.

The State presented evidence of Sagastegui’s prior convictions in courts of limited jurisdiction for using force against another (1991 and 1995), disturbing the peace (1995), driving with a suspended license (1995), and resisting arrest (1995). Sagastegui declined to present any evidence on his own behalf.

During closing arguments, Sagastegui told the jury, “I did something wrong. I deserve the death penalty. . . . I'm not sorry for what I did, and I don't know how to explain that, but I'm not.” RP (2/12/96) at 48. The jury returned an affirmative answer to the mitigating-circumstances question: “[h]aving in mind the crime of which the defendant has been found guilty, are you convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that there are not sufficient mitigating circumstances to merit leniency?” RP (2/12/96) at 55.

Consistent with the verdict, the trial court sentenced Sagastegui to death.

At the hearing on March 11, 1996, the sentencing court considered Sagastegui’s request to waive his rights to a general appeal and to assistance of counsel for review. The court required him to answer a seven-page written questionnaire to ensure he fully understood the consequences of his decision, and questioned him about his answers. It also considered testimony from sanity commission members who examined him at Eastern State Hospital. The sentencing court entered findings that Sagastegui was mentally competent to validly waive rights to appeal and assistance of counsel for both general appeal and mandatory statutory review, and that his decision to waive was “voluntarily, intelligently, and knowingly.” RP (3/11/96) at 88-89.

Appeals

The Washington Supreme Court reviewed the validity of the waiver of general appellate review and the mandatory review issues under RCW 10.95.130.

The decision stated that the validity of a capital defendant's waiver of general appellate review was reviewed de novo by the Supreme Court. It also stated that if the waiver was valid, the Supreme Court was still required to address mandatory review questions pertaining to the penalty phase.

The Supreme Court described the test for the waiver as whether the waiver was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent, requiring that the defendant had the capacity to understand the choice between life and death and knowingly and intelligently waive appeal rights, was provided sufficient information to make an informed decision, and fully understood the consequences of waiver.

It held that a competent defendant convicted of a capital offense could elect not to present any mitigating evidence in the penalty phase. It held a court could not override the constitutional right of a fully informed and competent defendant to direct the course of his own legal defense. It also held that the Supreme Court could conduct statutory review even though no mitigating evidence was presented if it was the defendant’s own choice and he was competent.

The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment and sentence. It concluded that Sagastegui’s waiver of general appellate review was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent; that Sagastegui had the right not to present mitigating evidence in the penalty phase; that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict on mitigating circumstances; that the sentence of death was not disproportionate to sentences imposed in similar cases; that the jury’s verdict was not the result of passion or prejudice; and that no evidence indicated that Sagastegui was mentally retarded. The court remanded the case for further proceedings.

A quotation in the decision included a statement by the Ninth Circuit in Langford v. Day: “We conclude that , when the defendant and his counsel ask the court to find no mitigation, the Eighth Amendment does not require the sentencing court to search the record in order to evaluate and discuss specifically less-thansubstantial unenumerated mitigating factors neither offered nor pointed out as mitigating at the time of sentencing.” Langford, 110 F3d at 1392.

The Washington Supreme Court also included a statement attributed to Sagastegui in an unsolicited submission: “I got a thrill out of the killing. It gave me a great sense of power. I liked it. I'd like to do it again. I told this to the jury and now I am telling you.... I pled guilty because I am guilty. Pay attention. Don't you get it, I killed, I loved it, I want to do some more.” Def.'s Resp. to Supreme Court at 1.

Outcome

Jeremy Sagastegui was executed on October 13, 1998 by lethal injection in Washington. The execution proceeded after the U.S. Supreme Court lifted a stay of execution that had been issued by a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The prison superintendent John Lambert said shortly before the execution: “Inmate Sagastegui has no last words. The process will continue.”

Benton County Prosecutor Andy Miller said Sagastegui “never showed any compassion, any remorse.”

Carl Sonderman, a lawyer for Sagastegui, agreed and said: “We all recognize Jeremy was a sociopath.”

Other details

Sagastegui had previously stopped taking medication (Vasotec for hypertension, Paxil for depression, and Pepcid for gastritis) and exhibited unusual behavior in jail. The commission report from Eastern State Hospital was sealed at Sagastegui’s request.

The Washington Supreme Court decision discussed RCW 10.95.130 and stated that the purpose of proportionality review was to ensure the sentence was not imposed in a “wanton and freakish” manner.

During the execution, reports described that Sagastegui was strapped to a gurney and that a medical team administered lethal chemicals including thiopental sodium, pancuronium bromide and potassium chloride mixed with saline. The reports stated he stared at the ceiling and that his eyelids fluttered before breathing stopped.

Relatives of Sagastegui’s victims witnessed the execution: Candise Myers, Kasie Sarbacher and Robert Getz. Sagastegui had requested that his mother be a witness, but no member of his family attended.

Outside the prison, about 100 death-penalty opponents prayed silently in a fenced area downhill from the prison, and about 50 death-penalty advocates in another area 50 feet away had already left the prison grounds by the time Sagastegui died.

The crimes were described as occurring in a mobile home in rural Finley, Washington, located east of Kennewick, where Sagastegui had been baby-sitting Sarbacher’s two children, with the second child, a 1-year-old girl, unharmed.