He proved he never had a fair trial. He's still facing life in prison
/
A Queens judge reversed his own decision and set aside the 2001 attempted murder conviction of Robert Majors earlier this month. Photo courtesy of Tom Hoffman
By David Brand
Ten days ago, Robert Majors won a major breakthrough in a lengthy fight to prove he never got a fair trial before he was sentenced to die in prison. It’s unclear what will happen next.
The same Queens judge who locked Majors up for his role in a brutal 1997 armored truck heist reversed his own decision on May 18, vacating a virtual life sentence for attempted murder and armed robbery based on crucial evidence-sharing violations by prosecutors in the Queens District Attorney’s Office.
Judge John Latella determined that prosecutors withheld a handwritten affidavit from a police informant who named another suspect, a document that would have helped Majors bolster his defense.
It wasn’t a total victory for Majors. Latella upheld a 12-years-to-life sentence for weapons possession based on events that happened a day after the robbery, when Majors was arrested carrying a bag of guns.
Nevertheless, the two reversals mean Majors is eligible for parole after serving nearly double his minimum sentence.
“Mr. Majors can now be given an opportunity to have a life,” said his attorney, Tom Hoffman.
But the clock is ticking, Hoffman added.
Majors, who has diabetes, is detained at Greenhaven Correctional Facility, which has had more cases of COVID-19 than all but one New York prison, according to state data. His underlying health conditions make him particularly vulnerable to the lethal illness.
A coalition of reform groups will hold a virtual rally on Friday at noon to call for Majors’ release by parole or clemency as the coronavirus spreads behind bars.
They are also urging Queens District Attorney Melinda Katz not to retry Majors after a judge found crucial violations by the prosecutors who first tried the case 23 years ago. Katz’s decision, they say, could have broader implications for the direction of the DA’s office under her command.
Hidden evidence in a high-profile case
The armed robbery that led to Majors’ initial conviction generated major headlines in 1997.
The assailants committed a brazen ambush on an armored truck traveling through Flushing, firing more than 50 shots and nearly killing the two guards, one an off-duty detective and the other a retired cop.
Almost immediately, Majors became a target of the investigation after his brother-in-law Aaron Boone was arrested.
A day after the attack, he led officers in a car chase before ditching the vehicle — with his 4-year-old daughter still inside. He ran away, but cops caught up with him and found a duffel bag stuffed with guns, including the weapons used in the attack.
Majors and Hoffman do not dispute that sequence of events, but they say that Majors picked up the bag as a favor for Boone without realizing it contained guns.
Majors’ various defense attorneys, including Hoffman, and his three previous lawyers contend that there was never enough evidence to link Majors to the shootout the day before.
Majors even offered a compelling alibi, they said. At his jury trial, a chiropractor testified that Majors was at her office receiving treatment around the time of the robbery. The jury ultimately decided to convict Majors, but his conviction was reversed for juror misconduct — members had used a map that was not entered into evidence to assess whether he could have traveled from the chiropractor’s office to the crime scene.
That meant Majors faced a new trial in 2001. He opted for a jury-less bench trial before Latella, who ultimately convicted Majors of attempted murder, weapons possession and armed robbery and sentenced him to die behind bars.
But a key piece of evidence, withheld by prosecutors for 21 years, provided the grounds to challenge the convictions.
A police informant had handwritten a three-page affidavit identifying another suspect named “Rasheed” as one of the perpetrators. A statement from the same informant, William McKinney, was used to arrest a third suspect who was also later convicted for his role in the 1997 robbery.
Prosecutors never shared the document — known as the “McKinney affidavit” — with Majors or his attorneys until 2018, after Majors’ 10th Freedom of Information Law request.
“We could have done so much more, but this document was withheld,” said Majors’ first attorney, William Martin, during direct examination at a November hearing. “If I would have had this document, it would have given me a number of different avenues to pursue a defense of Mr. Majors.”
A judge reverses himself
Majors and Hoffman centered their years-long challenge on the McKinney affidavit, which they said the Queens DA’s Office had withheld in violation of the evidence-sharing mandate known as Brady — legal shorthand for a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision forcing prosecutors to share all materials favorable to the defendant.
Latella agreed, citing the Brady violation as the basis for his decision to vacate the two convictions.
“I find that Mr. Majors has met his burden of showing by a preponderance of the evidence that the people failed to turn over various Brady material, and I am granting his motion to vacate the convictions,” Latella said, according to the court transcript.
“The exculpatory nature of the information contained in the McKinney affidavit is to this defendant readily apparent,” he continued, adding that the affidavit naming another suspect “would have provided his attorneys with clear avenues for investigation and opportunities to highlight weaknesses in the people's case.”
The Queens DA’s Office under late DA Richard Brown and current DA Melinda Katz contended that the Brady claim was “utterly meritless,” a characterization included in prosecutors’ closing arguments earlier this month.
During those closing arguments, Latella asked Assistant DA Christopher Blira-Koessler whether he agreed that the “affidavit does certainly contain what would be considered exculpatory.”
“I have a problem with agreeing to that,” Blira-Koessler responded, adding that the informant, McKinney, was known to Majors and his original defense attorney. “After you look at that, what exculpatory value does this statement have after all that?”
Prosecutors offered that response after abandoning their previous argument that the assistant district attorney trying the case had turned over the affidavit in 1997.
Those arguments did not sway Latella.
“We're heartened and gratified by the decision,” said Hoffman, the attorney representing Majors. “We believe that the Brady violation was egregious and we are grateful that the judge has agreed.”
Next steps uncertain
Despite the victory, Majors remains behind bars.
Latella upheld the weapons possession conviction for which he had imposed a 12-years-to-life sentence. In order to be released, Majors must rely on the state parole board, which is not currently conducting inmate interviews during the COVID-19 outbreak. Gov. Andrew Cuomo could also commute Majors’ sentence, an extremely unlikely scenario.
Majors’ fate also rests in the hands of Katz, the new Queens DA, who must determine whether or not she will retry Majors. Katz and the Queens DA’s Office did not respond to calls and emails seeking more information for this story.
To Hoffman and other advocates, Katz’s decision may have broader implications for how the office handles cases of misconduct stemming from the previous administration.
In the years before Katz took office, Queens prosecutors, including many who remain in the DA’s Office, have faced repeated claims of prosecutorial misconduct. Top officials have been accused of fostering an “office policy that was indifferent to misconduct and rewarded prosecutors for ‘winning’ cases,” according to a lawsuit filed by a man wrongfully convicted in Queens.
In his decision, Latella made clear that he “by no means impugns the efforts” of the assistant district attorneys who worked on the case.
Indeed, he commended the prosecutors, writing that he does “not ascribe any bad motive to the Assistant District Attorneys who handled these trials for failing to turn over the documents in question to the defendant.”
Instead, he said, the failure to turn over the McKinney affidavit may have been an “oversight, failure to credit the source of the information or some other factor,” he continued.
Regardless of why the prosecutors failed to disclose the affidavit, Majors and justice reform advocates await Katz’s next move.
“I think Melinda Katz has an opportunity to show the nation that she has the courage to be fair,” said activist Derrick Hamilton, who fought to get his own wrongful conviction overturned after 23 years behind bars. “I have confidence in Melinda Katz and I would be discouraged if it didn’t happen because she ran on a fairness platform.”
Hamilton said Majors also deserves immediate release from prison after serving more than two decades on his lone remaining conviction.
“He served more than enough time,” he said. “It’s clear there was a violation of his constitutional rights and even if they decided to retry him he deserves his liberty.”
