RAE CARRUTH’S WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS DENIED

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Rae Carruth’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus following the conviction of the former Carolina Panther football star for conspiracy to commit the murder of his pregnant girlfriend, use of an instrument to destroy their unborn child, and discharge of a firearm into occupied property.

Carruth went to a movie with Cherica Adams, who was eight months pregnant with their son. After the movie they went to his house to pick up her car and they drove to her house. While at his house, Carruth called his friend Michael Kennedy. Adams followed Carruth to her house. Kennedy with two passengers followed Adams. As they approached her house, Carruth slowed down. Kennedy came up alongside Adams and a passenger in his car, Van Brett Watkins shot her four times. Carruth and Kennedy disappeared. Adams called 911 and was taken to the hospital where she held on to life for another month. The baby was saved but Adams died.

During the trial three problematic pieces of evidence were used by the district attorney: two statements by Adams to a police officers and notes that she wrote to a nurse in the hospital. For the purpose of the appeal the court assumed that the admission of the items were constitutional errors but it determined that there was sufficient evidence corroborating the items and admissible items to convict him without considering the three items.

The primary piece of evidence was the transcript of the 911 call. During the call Adams clearly laid out the events of the evening and they were quite inculpatory. Numerous witnesses testified for both sides with significant cross examination but Carruth’s attorney was unable to make any dent in the facts as stated above. Experts testified about the effect of drugs given to Adams in the hospital. Her cousin and her father testified about statements she made to them. Other witnesses testified that Carruth had a motive to kill Adams. He was angry that she would not have an abortion and he was afraid that child support payments would bankrupt him.

In the end the appellate court found that the erroneously entered evidence did not have a “substantial and injurious effect” upon the verdict and denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.