Prior Prison Record: Two year sentence from Harris County for Aggravated Assault. Released on 1/3/1996.

Summary: On June 26, 1997, Frazier and co-defendant Jermain Herron burglarized a private residence. Then they took the property and went next door to a residence where a white female was alone with her son. The victim offered them a ride into town and when she went out to start her vehicle, Frazier followed her. When she went back into the house, he shot her in the face with a 9-millimeter handgun. He then shot her again in the back of the head. The co-defendant shot the son one time in the head and three more times in the chest and abdominal area with a 9-millimeter handgun. Frazier and the co-defendant then took Nutt’s pickup and fled the scene.

Texas Department of Criminal Justice

Texas Attorney General Media Advisory

AUSTIN – Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott offers the following information about Derrick Frazier, who is scheduled to be executed after 6 p.m. Thursday, August 31, 2006. In Oct. 1998, Frazier was convicted and sentenced to death for the Refugio shooting deaths of Betsy Nutt and her son Cody.

FACTS OF THE CRIME

When Jerry Nutt arrived home from work in the summer of 1997, he found the bodies of his wife, Betsy Nutt, and the couple’s 15-year-old son, Cody, in the family’s mobile home, located on the Dos Amigos Ranch, about ten miles north of Refugio.

The murder investigation quickly focused on Frazier and another man. When police arrested Frazier, he was wearing a pair of white tennis shots that had been taken in a burglary at the ranch owner’s home, the same day as the murders. Police also recovered additional property taken in the burglary from Frazier’s girlfriend and from the apartment where Frazier was hiding. In addition, forensic experts matched Frazier’s fingerprints to fingerprints recovered from inside the Nutts’ pickup, which was stolen the day of the murders. When police searched the apartment of the other suspect’s girlfriend, investigators recovered Betsy Nutt’s cell phone and a 9-millimeter handgun, which was stolen from the ranch owners’ home. Firearms experts determined the gun was the murder weapon.

Frazier provided a videotaped statement in which he admitted to murdering Betsy Nutt, stealing her pickup, and burglarizing the ranch owners’ home.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Aug. 8, 1997 -- A Refugio County grand jury indicted Frazier for the capital murders of Betsy and Cody Nutt.
Oct. 7, 1998 -- Judgment is entered after a jury found Frazier guilty of capital murder and sentenced to death.
Dec. 27, 2000 -- Concurrent with his direct appeal proceedings, Frazier filed a state writ application in the trial court.
Mar. 28, 2001 -- Frazier’s conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
May 9, 2001 -- The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied rehearing.
Jun. 27, 200 -- The Court of Criminal Appeals denied Frazier’s application for state habeas relief and adopted the findings of the trial court.
Oct 29, 2001 -- The Texas Supreme Court denied certiorari off direct appeal.
Oct. 29, 2002 -- Frazier filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in a federal district court.
Feb. 14, 2003 -- Frazier filed his amended federal petition.
Sep. 29, 2004 -- The federal district court denied habeas relief.
Aug 10, 2005 -- The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied Frazier a certificate of appealability.
Nov. 3, 2005 -- The 5th Circuit Court denied Frazier’s motion for rehearing.
Jan. 31, 2006 --Frazier petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for certiorari review and a stay of execution.
April 17, 2006 -- The Supreme Court denied the petition.
April 18, 2006 -- Frazier filed a successive application for state habeas relief in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
April 24, 2006 -- The appeals court granted Frazier's motion to stay his execution.
June 28, 2006 -- Frazier found not to meet the criteria for filing a successive habeas which was dismissed as abuse of the writ.
July 6, 2006 -- The trial court entered an order seting Frazier's execution date for August 31, 2006.
August 4, 2006 -- Frazier filed a motion to vacate the execution order in the trial court.
August 15, 2006 -- The trial court denied Frazier's motion to vacate.
August 17, 2006 -- Frazier filed a request for leave to file a successive federal habeas petition in the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

PRIOR CRIMINAL HISTORY

Frazier had a prior conviction for aggravated assault for shooting a man, and a juvenile conviction for robbery. Frazier also had pending assault charges against him at the time he was arrested for the murders.

Houston Chronicle

"Frazier executed for slayings of woman, son," by Michael Graczyk. (Associated Press Aug. 31, 2006, 9:17PM)

HUNTSVILLE — Insisting he was innocent, condemned inmate Derrick Frazier was executed this evening for the slayings of a South Texas mother and her teenage son at their home nine years ago. "I am innocent. An innocent man is being put to death. I've professed my innocence for nine years and I will continue to profess my innocence for another nine years," Frazier said. He repeatedly told the woman he married by proxy that he loved her.

"Tell my people we must continue on. Do not give up the fight. Do not give up hope. We can make it happen," he said. After again expressing love to the woman, who was sobbing as she watched through a window a few feet away, he told her: "Stay strong, Baby. I love you forever." He was urging her to smile as the lethal drugs began taking effect. He was pronounced dead at 6:18 p.m., seven minutes later.

Frazier, 29, was the second convicted murderer to die for the shooting deaths of Betsy Nutt, 41, and her son, Cody, 15. Three months ago, Frazier's companion, Jermaine Herron, was executed.

He was the 20th Texas prisoner executed this year, one more than all of last year in the nation's most active death penalty state. At least seven other executions are scheduled for the remainder of year.

"He deserved just what he got, only a lot worse," Jerry Nutt, who lost his wife and only child in the killings, said after watching Frazier die. He also witnessed Herron's execution. "I just wish I could have done it myself," he said. "I'd kind of liked to have been the one to push the button. "I know that sounds pretty cold, but when you lose someone like I've lost, my wife and son, and you hear animals like that, playing the system, getting a stay, cruel and unusual punishment is us waiting on justice."

Less than an hour before his scheduled execution time, the justices rejected three petitions and requests for reprieves.

Frazier, who was born in Dallas and grew up in Galveston, blamed a coerced confession for convincing a jury to convict him of capital murder and the decision that he should be put to death. "I wasn't there. I did not commit the crime," Frazier, also known by his Muslim name, Hasan al-Shakur, said last week from death row near Livingston.

But Michael Sheppard, the Refugio County district attorney who prosecuted Frazier and Herron, said Frazier was "cool as a cucumber" as he talked about the June 26, 1997, slayings. "There are videotapes," Sheppard said of Frazier's discussions with detectives following his arrest. "He's sitting on a couch, drinking a Coke. "In his confession he talked about details only someone in the house would know, where the bodies were, how many bullets were in them, where they were shot. They both said Herron shot Cody, handed the gun to Frazier, and Frazier shot Betsy Nutt. And bear in mind, they're giving these statements separately."

Evidence showed that when the pair knocked on the door of the Nutt family's mobile home, claiming car trouble and needing to make a phone call, the woman invited them in, gave them iced tea and offered to drive them in her pickup the 10 miles to town. She was shot twice in the head. Her son was shot four times, including two shots to the head. Jerry Nutt found the bodies of his wife and son when he arrived home from work that day, June 26, 1997.

Frazier was scheduled to die April 27, three weeks before Herron, but won a reprieve from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. When the court lifted its reprieve two months later, the execution was reset for today. Frazier blamed the slayings on Herron. Herron, testifying at his own trial, blamed them on Frazier.

According to court records, Frazier and Herron showed up at a home near the Nutt residence and inquired about work. Frazier's father once had been a ranch foreman in the area. During the visit, they spotted guns in the house and decided to return to steal them. Evidence showed they came back the next day when the people who lived there were gone, broke in, sat around drinking in the house and watched as Betsy Nutt drove up to her place. Then they walked over and told her the story about their car breaking down. After the shooting, they used her truck to carry loot from the neighbor's house, including some clothing Frazier was wearing when he was arrested in Victoria, about 30 miles to the north. The truck was found parked outside Frazier's apartment and items taken from the burglary were recovered from his girlfriend. Frazier's fingerprints were inside the truck.

Frazier had an earlier conviction for aggravated assault for shooting a man and a juvenile conviction for robbery. When he was arrested for the Nutt killings, he had assault charges pending against him.

Scheduled to die next is Farley Matchett, 43, facing lethal injection Sept. 12 for a robbery-slaying in Houston 15 years ago.

Fort Worth Star Telegram

"Inmate set to die for S. Texas slayings." (The Associated Press Posted on Wed, Aug. 30, 2006)

LIVINGSTON -- Betsy Nutt thought she was being nice to the two young men who showed up at her family's South Texas mobile home and said they had car trouble and needed to make a phone call. She even served them iced tea on the hot afternoon nine summers ago and offered to drive them in her pickup truck the 10 miles to town.

For her courtesies, the 41-year-old woman got two bullets in the head. Her 15-year-old son, Cody, was shot four times, including two shots to the head. Jerry Nutt found the bodies of his wife and son when he arrived to his Refugio County home after work that day, June 26, 1997.

Derrick Frazier, 29, one of the two men condemned for their slayings, was set to die Thursday evening. His partner, Jermaine Herron, was executed three months ago in the same death chamber in Huntsville. "I can't wait for Frazier's execution," Jerry Nutt said after watching Herron die May 17. "We'll be here with bells on. It's what we've been waiting for, for nine years."

Frazier, who was born in Dallas but grew up in Galveston, would be the 20th Texas prisoner executed this year, one more than all of last year in the nation's busiest capital punishment state. His lawyers went to the U.S. Supreme Court to try to stop the lethal injection, alleging jury misconduct at his trial. "I'm innocent," Frazier, also known by his Muslim name, Hasan al-Shakur, said last week from death row near Livingston. "I wasn't there. I did not commit the crime. I've been saying that for the last nine years. Nothing has changed." Frazier was scheduled to die April 27, three weeks before Herron, but won a reprieve from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. When the court lifted its reprieve two months later, the execution was reset for Thursday.

"The only thing they have was this so-called confession, which was a coerced or forced confession," Frazier said. "You remember Perry Mason and Matlock, those TV shows? That's what this whole case seems like. But I don't think Perry Mason could deal with this. It's crazy." Frazier, who did not testify in court, insisted the physical evidence all pointed to Herron. Herron testified in his own defense, saying he wasn't at the house and that Frazier was solely responsible. But jurors convicted both and decided they should be put to death.

According to court records, Frazier and Herron showed up at a home near the Nutt residence and inquired about work. Frazier's father once had been a ranch foreman in the area. During the visit, they spotted guns in the house and decided to return to steal them. Evidence showed they came back the next day when the people who lived there were gone, broke in, sat around drinking in the house and watched as Betsy Nutt drove up to her place. Then they walked over and told her the story about their car breaking down.

"Frazier admitted in his confession he was the one who murders Betsy Nutt and that Herron had murdered Cody Nutt," Michael Sheppard, the Refugio County district attorney who prosecuted both men, said. "And Herron in his confession made the same admissions."

After the shooting, they used her truck to carry loot from the neighbor's house, including some clothing Frazier was wearing when he was arrested in Victoria, about 30 miles to the north. The truck was found parked outside Frazier's apartment and items taken from the burglary were recovered from his girlfriend. Frazier's fingerprints were inside the truck.

Frazier had an earlier conviction for aggravated assault for shooting a man and a juvenile conviction for robbery. When he was arrested for the Nutt killings, he had assault charges pending against him. "I've been in trouble before," he said. "I don't sit up here and try to perpetrate to the people I'm an angel."

Earlier in the year, Frazier and Herron had cells near one another in an area of the Polunsky Unit known as "death watch," reserved for inmates with pending execution dates. "I got a chance to talk with him," Frazier said. "He apologized for dragging me through a lot of this stuff."

Scheduled to die after Frazier is Farley Matchett, 43, facing lethal injection Sept. 12 for a robbery-slaying in Houston 15 years ago

Reuters News

"Texas executes man for murdering mother, son." (Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:13pm ET)

HUNTSVILLE, Texas (Reuters) - Texas executed a former drug dealer on Thursday for the 1997 murders of a 41-year-old woman and her 15-year-old son at their home near the south Texas town of Refugio.

Derrick Frazier, 29, was condemned for shooting Betsy and Cody Nutt to death in their rural mobile home on June 26, 1997, after pretending he and accomplice Jermaine Herron needed a ride because of a car breakdown. Frazier, then 20, confessed to shooting Betsy and Cody Nutt, but later recanted and said Herron killed the mother and son. Herron was executed in May for his role in the slayings. The men committed a burglary at a house near the Nutt residence prior the murders.

A friend of the two men testified they intended to kill someone on the night of burglary to obtain a vehicle. The owners of the house they broke into were not home. Betsy Nutt's pickup truck was stolen on the night she was killed. Frazier's fingerprints were found inside the truck when it was recovered.

While strapped to a gurney in the death chamber shortly before his lethal injection, Frazier said he was being wrongly executed. "I am innocent," he said. "I am being punished for a crime I did not commit. I have professed my innocence for nine years, and I continue to say I am innocent."

Frazier was the 20th person executed in Texas this year and the 375th put to death in the state since it resumed capital punishment in 1982, six years after the U.S. Supreme Court lifted a national death penalty ban. Both totals lead the nation.

Frazier did not request a last meal. Texas has seven more executions scheduled this year.

Tyler Morning Telegraph

"INMATE EXECUTED FOR SOUTH TEXAS DOUBLE SLAYING." (ASSOCIATED PRESS 08/31/2006)

HUNTSVILLE, Texas (AP) - Insisting he was innocent, condemned inmate Derrick Frazier was executed Thursday evening for the slayings of a South Texas mother and her teenage son at their home nine years ago.

"I am innocent. An innocent man is being put to death. I've professed my innocence for nine years and I will continue to profess my innocence for another nine years," Frazier said. He repeatedly told the woman he married by proxy that he loved her. "Tell my people we must continue on. Do not give up the fight. Do not give up hope. We can make it happen," he said. After again expressing love to the woman who was sobbing as she watched through a window a few feet away, he told her, "Stay strong, Baby. I love you forever." He was urging her to smile as the lethal drugs began taking effect. He was pronounced dead at 6:18 p.m., seven minutes later.

Frazier, 29, was the second convicted murderer to die for the shooting deaths of Betsy Nutt, 41, and her son, Cody, 15. Three months ago, Frazier's companion, Jermaine Herron, was executed.

He was also be the 20th Texas prisoner executed this year, one more than all of last year in the nation's most active death penalty state. At least seven other executions are scheduled for the remainder of year. Less than an hour before his scheduled execution time, the justices rejected three petitions and requests for reprieves.

Frazier, who was born in Dallas and grew up in Galveston, blamed a coerced confession for convincing a jury to convict him of capital murder and decide he should be put to death. "I wasn't there. I did not commit the crime," Frazier, also known by his Muslim name, Hasan al-Shakur, said last week from death row near Livingston.

But Michael Sheppard, the Refugio County district attorney who prosecuted Frazier and Herron, said Frazier was "cool as a cucumber" as he talked about the June 26, 1997, slayings. "There are videotapes" Sheppard said of Frazier's discussions with detectives following his arrest. "He's sitting on a couch, drinking a Coke. "In his confession he talked about details only someone in the house would know, where the bodies were, how many bullets were in them, where they were shot. They both said Herron shot Cody, handed the gun to Frazier and Frazier shot Betsy Nutt. And bear in mind, they're giving these statements separately."

Evidence showed that when the pair knocked on the door of the Nutt family's mobile home, claiming car trouble and needing to make a phone call, the woman invited them in, gave them iced tea and offered to drive them in her pickup truck the 10 miles to town. She was shot twice in the head. Her son was shot four times, including two shots to the head. Jerry Nutt found the bodies of his wife and son when he arrived home from work that day, June 26, 1997.

Frazier was scheduled to die April 27, three weeks before Herron, but won a reprieve from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. When the court lifted its reprieve two months later, the execution was reset for Thursday.

Frazier blamed the slayings on Herron. Herron, testifying at his own trial, blamed them on Frazier.

According to court records, Frazier and Herron showed up at a home near the Nutt residence and inquired about work. Frazier's father once had been a ranch foreman in the area. During the visit, they spotted guns in the house and decided to return to steal them. Evidence showed they came back the next day when the people who lived there were gone, broke in, sat around drinking in the house and watched as Betsy Nutt drove up to her place. Then they walked over and told her the story about their car breaking down.

After the shooting, they used her truck to carry loot from the neighbor's house, including some clothing Frazier was wearing when he was arrested in Victoria, about 30 miles to the north. The truck was found parked outside Frazier's apartment and items taken from the burglary were recovered from his girlfriend. Frazier's fingerprints were inside the truck.

Frazier had an earlier conviction for aggravated assault for shooting a man and a juvenile conviction for robbery. When he was arrested for the Nutt killings, he had assault charges pending against him.

Scheduled to die next is Farley Matchett, 43, facing lethal injection Sept. 12 for a robbery-slaying in Houston 15 years ago.

Texas Execution Information Center by David Carson.

Derrick Frazier, 29, was executed by lethal injection on 31 August 2006 in Huntsville, Texas for the robbery and murder of a woman and her son.

On 25 June 1997, Frazier, then 20, and Jermaine Herron, 18, visited a ranch owned by Ron Lucich, ten miles north of Refugio. Herron and his father had lived on the ranch many years earlier, when Herron's father was Lucich's foreman*. Mr. and Mrs. Lucich were away, but their three children were home. Herron introduced Derrick Frazier as his cousin, Kevin, and stated that they came to see whether the Lucichs had any work for them. They decided to "hang out" until the Lucichs came home. Mrs. Lucich then came home and became concerned about the two men loitering in her home. She called her husband, who told her to "get them out of there." Mrs. Lucich took the men and her children out for lunch, then dropped the men off at the house of one of Herron's friends. Later that day, Ron Lucich called Herron and told him to never come back to his ranch.

That afternoon, Frazier and Herron made plans to burglarize the ranch. They had observed several guns in the home, and they learned that the Lucichs were planning to be out of town the following day. They drove with another man, Michael Brown, to a roadside park from which the ranch could be viewed, and discussed their plan further. A second trailer home, occupied by Betsy Nutt and her 15-year-old son, Cody, was also on the property.

At about 9:00 p.m., Crystal Mascorro drove Frazier, Herron, and Brown to the entrance of the Lucich ranch. All three men wore bandannas over their faces, and Herron carried a .22-caliber rifle. As they approached the Lucichs' trailer, the porch light came on. Brown turned back and ran. Frazier and Herron subsequently joined him, and they all left the ranch.

A few hours later, in the early morning hours of 26 June, the thee men drove back to the ranch. This time, Brown dropped Frazier and Herron off. They hid and waited for the Lucichs to leave. At about 7:30 a.m., the Lucichs left. Frazier and Herron then entered their trailer and gathered up some guns and other items. They then called Brown and told him to come pick them up. They were still waiting at 2:00 p.m., when Betsy and Cody Nutt came home. They approached Mrs. Nutt, told her that their car had broken down, and asked to use her restroom. Once inside Nutt's trailer, they forced the Nutts to their knees, then shot each of them twice in the head with a 9mm pistol. They then drove away in Nutt's truck.

Police spotted Nutt's pickup later that night and arrested Frazier. Fingerprints taken from the inside of the pickup matched his. Police also recovered property taken in the burglary from Frazier's girlfriend and from the apartment where he was hiding. Frazier confessed on videotape to burglarizing the Lucich's home, murdering Betsy Nutt, and stealing her pickup.

In his confession, Frazier said that Betsy Nutt offered to give Herron and him a ride into town, and the three of them got into her pickup. After Nutt started the engine, she realized she had forgotten her mobile phone, so she turned off the engine and went back inside. Herron then told Frazier, "I'm going to do 'em now." Frazier responded, "It's your business." When Nutt came back out, Herron said that he needed to use the bathroom, so Nutt gave him permission to go inside the trailer. Herron then came back out and told Nutt that she had a telephone call. Nutt exited the truck and walked inside her home, with Frazier following her. Once inside, Herron pointed a pistol at Nutt and told her not to move. Hearing the commotion, Cody Nutt then came into the room. Herron shot Cody with the pistol, then handed the gun to Frazier and told him to shoot Betsy. Frazier then fired two shots, killing her. Herron also confessed to the crime, stating that he killed Cody Nutt and Frazier killed Betsy Nutt.

Frazier had prior convictions for unlawfully carrying a weapon and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

A jury convicted Frazier of capital murder in October 1998 and sentenced him to death. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the conviction and sentence in March 2001. All of his subsequent appeals in state and federal court were denied.

Jermaine Herron was also convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death.

Frazier gave a television interview in April 2006, when a previous execution date was approaching. He said that the confession he gave at the time of his arrest was coerced. "The only thing I'm guilty of is possession of stolen property." Frazier said that he was sitting in Nutt's pickup truck while Herron was inside the trailer. "I heard gunshots. He come out. I asked him directly, 'What the [expletive] wrong with you?' That's what I asked him. 'Man, man, get me up out of here.'" In the interview, Frazier said that he felt no remorse for the victims. "Driving down the highway," he said, "you see a raccoon on the side of the road. It just got run over by a truck. Do you have any remorse? You didn't even know that raccoon, did you?"

Frazier received a stay of execution, but his partner did not. Herron, who claimed at his trial and during interviews that he had nothing to do with the crime and Frazier was solely responsible, was put to death on 17 May. Later, Frazier's stay was lifted, and his execution was rescheduled for 31 August.

In another interview the week before he was put to death, Frazier - then going by the name Hasan al-Shakur - repeated his claim of innocence. "I wasn't there. I did not commit the crime. I've been saying that for the last nine years. Nothing has changed," he said. He again stated that his confession was coerced.

Refugio County District Attorney Michael Sheppard responded to Frazier's claims of a coerced confession. "He talked about details only someone in the house would know - where the bodies were, how many bullets were in them, where they were shot. [Frazier and Herron] both said Herron shot Cody, handed the gun to Frazier, and Frazier shot Betsy Nutt. And bear in mind, they're giving these statements separately."

In his last statement at his execution, Frazier proclaimed his innocence and expressed love to his wife, who he married by proxy while on death row. He was pronounced dead at 6:18 p.m.

* Reports vary as to which man's father used to work for Lucich. Most reports of Frazier's case state that his father was the former employee, while reports of Herron's case state that it was his father. In the writer's opinion, the reports that Herron's father was the former employee are more authoritative.

ProDeathPenalty.com

On June 26, 1997, Jerry Nutt arrived home from work and found his wife's body, lying in a pool of blood in the kitchen of their Refugio County home. As he leant down towards his wife, Betsy Nutt, he saw his 15-year-old son's body in the next room. Rushing to Cody's side, Jerry Nutt checked his wrist for a pulse, but knew at once that he was too late. "It was just limp and cold, and I knew he was dead."

Jermaine Herron and Derric Frazier had planned to burglarize the nearby home of Ron and Donna Lucich and then kill the family. The pair visited the Lucich home as part of their planning for the crime. Members of the Lucich testified that Herron and Frazier visited their house on June 25, the day before the killings. Herron and his father had lived at one time in the same mobile home where the Nutt family now was living. The family said Herron had maintained contact with the family even after Herron's father took another job and the Herrons moved from the mobile home that the Nutts later lived in. "Jermaine still called us to go to his football games and we still talked to his father. There were no bad feelings."

Mrs. Lucich testified that on one occasion, she arrived home and found Herron and Frazier at her house on an unannounced visit while neither parent was present. She invited them to have lunch in town as a ploy to get them to leave, she said. She dropped the men off at the home of one of Herron's friends and discouraged them from returning to her home when only her children were at home. Jerry Nutt testified that he knew Herron's father, but not Herron. Herron deceived everyone he introduced to Frazier, including the Luciches, by referring to Frazier as his cousin "Kevin."

That night Frazier, Herron and a third man, Michael Brown, approached the Lucich home wearing bandanas over their faces and carrying a sawed-off .22-caliber rifle. They fled when they saw a light come on at the Lucich house. Ron Lucich remembers that he went outside to smoke a cigarette that evening, unaware of the danger his family faced. During the early morning hours the next day, Frazier and Herron, without Brown, crawled under the house while the Lucich family got up. Ron Lucich said that he left the house for work about 10 minutes before his wife and three children left for the day to San Antonio. He said in those 10 minutes his family was vulnerable. "Most definitely," Ron Lucich said. "That is what it was all about. They intended to kill my family." After the family left, the pair entered the Lucich home and collected ropes, tape and socks, apparently to tie up the family upon their return. Then they waited inside the home for the family to return. They took guns, jewelry and clothes, some of which Frazier was wearing when he was arrested. The two men also put on some of Ron Lucich's clothes and shoes, leaving some of their own garments behind, intending to burn the home down. Investigators recovered a sawed-off 22-caliber rifle from underneath the Luciches' mobile home, where authorities believe the two men waited for the Luciches to leave for the day. Investigators also found that someone had written ``Killa,'' allegedly a nickname Herron used, on a concrete block supporting the Lucich family's mobile home.

Eventually the pair tired of waiting for the family and decided to walk to the Nutt residence, which was located on the Lucich's Dos Amigos Ranch. Betsy Nutt greeted the two men about 1 pm and offered them something to drink and a ride back to town after they told her their car had broken down. After Betsy Nutt started the 1997 green Ford F-150 supercab pickup, Herron claimed that he needed to use the bathroom. Once inside, Herron told Betsy Nutt that there was a phone call for her and insisted that she come back in and take it. Herron shot Cody and then Frazier shot Betsy Nutt twice in head. In a video-taped confession, Jermaine Herron said, "I was in the trailer, and I did shoot at the boy, and I put the gun on the table and left." Herron described how Betsy Nutt began screaming when her son was shot after Herron made him kneel.

The medical examiner testified that Cody was shot four times and that three of the shot, one to the chest and two to the head, would have been fatal shots. He testified that the chest wound was the likely first shot because the point of entry was near the back of the body and indicated a downward trajectory. Herron said after shooting the boy, he then left the gun on the table and Frazier picked it up and shot Betsy Nutt, who was shot twice in the head. Herron was asked why he and Frazier decided to kill Cody and Betsy Nutt. "He (Frazier) said, 'To be able to get away with it,' " Herron answered. Fragments of glass found in the hallway, kitchen and living room were from eyeglasses that Betsy Nutt apparently was wearing the day she was killed. They then left in the truck to pick up more property from the Lucich house.

Refugio County Sheriff Jim Hodges testified that the Nutts' truck was spotted at a Victoria apartment complex about two hours after it was reported missing. Frazier was arrested at that complex where Frazier was trying to give rifles stolen from the Lucich house to a man to whom he owed money.

The 49-year-old Jerry Nutt cried during portions of his testimony as he told the jury about his wife of 20 years and their son. "She was a real good person," he said. "She was the best woman that I had ever met." He recalled how his son Cody, who was an honor student, once represented his class in science competition in Chicago. His son loved to fish, hunt, had just gotten a dirt bike and loved practicing his guitar. "He was practicing so he could play for his grandparents," Jerry Nutt said. Jerry's parents were coming to visit that day. Jerry said he still finds himself asking "what if?" He had stayed home from work the three days before the slayings and believes that had he stayed home on that day his wife and son would be alive. But that day he went to work in Victoria to pay the drivers in the trucking company he and Ron Lucich own. "If I hadn't gone to work that day, they wouldn't be dead,'' he said. "I never answer the door without a gun.''

A Texas Ranger testified at trial that when he arrived at the Nutt home after the crime, Jerry Nutt was standing outside, and said, "Mr. Ranger, please find who did this to my family." One of the victims' relatives said he chose not to follow the final appeals process. "Justice grinds along so slowly," said Tom Tiller, Betsy Nutt's brother. "I try not to dwell on it or think about it too often, put it out of my mind sort of thing." Tiller was 55 when his then-41-year-old sister and nephew were murdered. For Herron's trial he traveled from his home in Germantown, Ohio, to testify. He described the crime as senseless and said his sister was a rock-solid Texan and his nephew was as bright and nice of a child as you could ever meet. Tiller said some of his family still is bitter about the murders, and he misses them every day, but he has tried to move on with this life. "Justice is going to be served," he said.

Frazier once said of the victims, "Driving down the highway, you see a raccoon on the side of the road. It just got run over by a truck. Do you have any remorse? You didn't even know that raccoon, did you?" Ron Lucich, the ranch owner where the killings took place nine years ago is close friends with Jerry Nutt, who lost his wife, Betsy, and son, Cody. Lucich said he's shocked by what Frazier said and totally offended by his smirking and disregard for killing two innocent people. "Derrick Frazier, of course, he's never shown any remorse, or anything about the murders. When he made a statement like they were like road kill, to me it was just like he killed them again," Lucich said. "When you can sit there and make a statement that they're no different than a raccoon that's been run over by a truck on the side of the road - they're human beings.

That's a sad time, and I and Jerry both feel he had a second opportunity to go on TV and kill them again." In April of 2006, Frazier received a stay of execution after his attorney's alleged that a juror in his trial had an improper conversation with Jerry Nutt. "Frazier gets a stay, and it's just another slap in the face. They come out here, and they shoot a 15-year-old child, a 40-year-old woman with no remorse, get convicted, get sentenced, and four days before the execution, Frazier gets a stay. It's mind boggling. It's just reaching down your throat, pulling out your heart and showing it to you," Lucich said. He and Mr. Nutt are both confident that justice will be served. Both say they will be in Huntsville to witness both executions.

National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty

Derrick Frazier, TX August 31
Do Not Execute Derrick Frazier

Derrick Frazier’s execution date has been set for Aug. 31. He was convicted and sentenced to death on Oct. 2, 1998 for the capital murders of Betsy and Cody Nutt in the course of a burglary ten miles in the country outside of Refugio, Texas.

Frazier, along with his supporters, maintains his innocence, claiming that he was in no way involved with these murders.

In a videotaped confession, which Frazier claims was coerced by police, he admitted to entering the Nutt residence on June 25, 1997 with an accomplice, Jermaine Herron. According to the same confession, the two had just finished stealing guns from a neighboring home. After conversing with the men, Betsy Nutt reportedly agreed to drive them to Refugio, a nearby town. As she started the engine, she realized that she had left her mobile phone in her home. While she went back into her home to retrieve her phone, Herron said to Frazier, “I’m going to do ‘em now,” to which Frazier responded that it was Herron’s business, according to the confession. After Nutt returned to the vehicle, Herron lured her back into her home. He threatened her with a pistol, concealed from sight until then. Betsy Nutt’s son, Cody, entered the room upon hearing the commotion. Herron shot and killed him. According to Frazier’s confession, he was a mere bystander until this point, when Herron handed him the pistol and ordered him to shoot Betsy Nutt. His confession claims he shot her twice. Before the two men left, Herron set the house on fire.

However, many doubt the validity of this confession, for several legitimate reasons. First, Frazier confessed only after being offered a 30-year deal in exchange. The jury never heard this detail, nor did they ever hear from Frazier about how he felt threatened, intimidated and coerced by his interrogating officer to provide a confession. Second, this confession was made without the presence of an attorney. During this videotaped interrogation, the officer informed Frazier of his right to an attorney, to which he responded, “If I could afford one, I would.” Instead of postponing the interrogation until a court-appointed attorney was present, the officer began to question Frazier. Third, Frazier’s supporters believe this confession was largely fabricated, especially since the co-defendant, Herron, allegedly confessed to an acquaintance over the phone that he killed both victims.

The videotaped “confession” became the prosecution’s smoking gun. With no physical evidence linking Frazier to the scene of the crime, the district attorney relied on the coerced confession to convince a nearly all-white jury that this young black defendant was, in fact, guilty of killing a white mother and child.

Although the prosecution failed to present much more than purely circumstantial evidence, the defense failed to present mitigating evidence that may have saved Frazier from the death penalty. Frazier’s childhood was overshadowed by his mother’s drug and alcohol abuse, an abusive stepfather, and sexual abuse by a family friend at the age of 12. Through it all, he maintained a good reputation in his school and church. At the age of 15, Frazier’s mother left their home and did not return. A month later, she was found dead of an overdose. Frazier turned to crime his mother’s abandonment and death, angry that she left him and that he “never got to say goodbye.”

Unfortunately, the jury did not hear any of this mitigating evidence of a severely troubled childhood. Instead, Frazier’s attorney did very little of his own investigation, did not contact family members who could have helped with the case, and was not fully prepared for the punishment phase of the trial. The attorney’s career was marred by prior complaints of misconduct, and he was investigated by the State Bar and placed on probation for three years shortly after the Frazier case.

In spite of the flaws of this investigation and this trial, Derrick Frazier awaits his execution on Texas’s death row.

Please write to Gov. Rick Perry on behalf of Derrick Frazier.

Hasan Shakur a/k/a/Derrick Frazier (Inmate Website)

Hasan was executed on August 31, 2006 On June 28, 2006, the Court of Criminal Appeals dismissed Hasan Shakur’s claims concerning juror misconduct. Because of this denial a new execution date has been set for August 31, 2006. The court did not believe that the statement from a witness, ‘saying she overheard a female juror saying “he (Mr. Shakur) is dead”, while making a slashing gesture across her neck in the courtroom,’ was true. The facts and the claims in this case have not changed in any way. The most serious claims are: -Incompetent trial attorney(s) -All-white jury -Forced confession -Lack of physical evidence -Questionable indictment -No mitigation evidence presented in punishment phase -Jurors and victims' family had contact during the trial Due to the phase that my case has moved into when an execution date was set, I allowed my webmaster to dedicate the first part of my website to myself and to my case. I'm not alone being in this situation though, and so I beg you all to check out the links below and help my comrades and friends too, who are in just as much need for help as I am. Before I close, let me thank you for taking the time to visit my website. Things aren't always as they might seem, or as they are made to appear, so keep your minds open and look beyond the surface. Stay strong and keep up the fight for a change to happen. -Hasan Shakur My Case and My Situation
Derrick Frazier: Innocent Man on Texas Death Row

The Derrick Frazier Support Committee
www.hasanshakur.com
hrctexas@hotmail.com

The purpose of The Derrick Frazier Support Committee is to inform the public about Derrick’s case, and to assist and help him in any way possible to prove his innocence, so that he can one day become a free man again. If you can help us in our struggle in any way possible, that being financially or with advice and assistance; please do not hesitate to contact us at one of the following addresses:

DFSC -Chair Person
Knut Erik Paulli
Morkved
8020 Bodoe Norway
Email: hrctexas@hotmail.com

DFSC – U.S./Canada Coordinator
Debbie Harris
59 12055 Greenland Drive
Richmond BC, V6 V2 C8
Canada
Email: dfrazier4045@hotmail.com

To donate, please go to www.hasanshakur.com/donate for more information

You can also contact Derrick directly:
Derrick Frazier #999284
Polunsky Unit
3872 FM 350 South
Livingston, Tx. 77351 U.S.A.

A Brief Summary of the Case and the Trial

On Monday September 21, 1998, the trial against Derrick Wayne Frazier (21) started in the Dewitt County Courthouse in Cuero, Texas. If he was found guilty of the charges raised against him, he could face the death penalty. The trial had been moved from Refugio to Cuero after questions had been raised in a pre-trial hearing, whether an impartial jury could be found in Refugio. The Presiding Judge at the trial was District Judge Stephen Williams. Attorneys for the State were Michael Sheppard (District Attorney), Alger Kendall (Assistant District Attorney) and Tom Wells. Court appointed attorneys Stephen A. Cihal and Elliot Costas represented Frazier.

On June 26, 1997, Jerry Nutt had found his wife Betsy Nutt (41) and son Cody Nutt (15) killed in their mobile home at the Dos Amigos Ranch in Refugio, Texas. A pickup truck had been stolen, and the neighbor residence, the Luchich family’s mobile home, had been burglarized and set on fire. The pickup truck was found outside a Victoria apartment complex later that day, and Frazier was arrested there and brought in for questioning. An arrest warrant was issued for another suspect in the case, Jermaine Herron (18), and Herron turned himself in a few days later.

At Frazier’s trial District Attorney Sheppard portrayed Frazier as the instigator of the murders and as the brain behind the crimes, claiming that Frazier has been showing the younger Herron – who would be tried separately a few months later – how to leave a crime scene without leaving any witnesses. Jerry Nutt testified for the jury about how he had found his wife and son dead. Members of the Luchich family testified about how Frazier and Herron had been paying a visit to their ranch the day before the murders saying they were looking for work. Herron, who knew the Luchichs as is father had once used to work for them, had introduced Frazier as his cousin Kenny. Crystal Mascorro (18), testified that it was she and her boyfriend Michael Brown, who had driven the suspects to the Dos Amigos Ranch that day, and it was Brown who had been driving them there the following day too when the burglary and the murders had taken place. Despite of all the testimonies and evidence that the prosecution presented, there wasn’t really anything that could place Frazier in the Nutt residence. However, after having been promised a 30-year deal, Frazier had admitted to having killed Betsy Nutt in a videotaped confession made to the police investigators and this piece of evidence was the prosecutions trump card. “The most important piece of evidence was the confession,” said District Attorney Mike Sheppard after the jury had found Frazier guilty. “That is was really put him at the scene.” And it was only after having asked to see the videotaped confession again, that the jury decided on the guilty verdict. The trial moved into the punishment phase in which the attorney for the defense presented practically no mitigating evidence, and on October 2, 1998, the jury, after having deliberated for two hours, sentenced Derrick Frazier to death. All the jurors were white. Derrick Frazier is Black.

Notes:

The moving of the trial
In a pre-trial hearing, attorneys for Derrick Frazier and his co-defendant Jermaine Herron asked for the trial to be moved because it was questionable whether an impartial jury could be found in Refugio. The trial was moved to Cuero, some 65 miles away. If it would be any easier to find an impartial jury in Cuero is an open question, but statements made by Betsy Nutt’s widower, Jerry Nutt, after it had been decided where the trials would be held, may cast some light over that question: “I'd be surprised if they could panel 12 jurors that aren't either involved in the case, know the defendants, of heard about it,” Nutt said. “Besides, Cuero has a reputation for being tough on criminals. I'd like to see the trial go over there.” These statements should prove to be very true, because according to witness testimony, at least two of the jurors knew the victims’ family.

The Jury:
With an all-white jury (one of the jurors being a Mexican woman married to a white man), the prosecution might very well have won the first battle already before the hearings had started as Derrick Frazier is a Black male. The racial composition of the jury in a case where a black man is charged for having killed a white woman and a white boy, is of course of great importance and could be decisive for the outcome of the verdict. The jury consisted of eight woman and four men. The jury foreman was Mr. Charles W. Wanjura. With eight female jurors, the prosecution also possibly had another advantage as these jurors especially, could easily identify themselves with the victim as a woman, and as a mother. Whether the composition of the jury; the jurors gender and race; affected the verdict one can only guess. But nevertheless it is important to keep these things in mind as one looks deeper into the case. According to witness testimony, one of the jurors even told Mr. Nutt “don’t worry, he’s dead (when speaking about Derrick Frazier), and the same juror made a slashing motion across her neck as she said this. Arraignments between this juror and Mr. Nutt to have lunch together were also made during the trial. It seems that this female juror had worked with one of the victims’ family, Mr. Nutt, as a teacher.

The Indictment
The indictment against Derrick Frazier outlined five theories that would support a capital-murder conviction: that Frazier murdered (1) Betsy Nutt and Cody Nutt during the same criminal transaction; (2) Betsy Nutt during the course of a robbery; (3) Cody Nutt in the course of robbing Betsy Nutt; (4) Betsy Nutt during the burglary of Ron Lucich’s home; (5) Cody Nutt during the burglary of Ron Lucich’s home. The trial court’s instructions allowed the jury to convict Derrick Frazier under any of those theories, either as a party or as the principle actor. The jury returned a general verdict that did not specify under which theory it found him guilty. Such jury instructions are not unusual, but the use of them in capital cases where the defendant’s life is at stake, is questionable. The result was nonetheless, that the prosecution was pretty free to present theories about the burglary of the Luchich home, and the murder of the Nutt’s, in a way that could make it difficult for the members of the jury to keep these two crimes separated. And the same goes for findings from the crime scene and physical evidence. With the pressure that jurors in a case like this are under, it is more than likely that an uncertain juror who is in doubt whether the defendant is guilty of both the burglary charges and the murder charges, could possibly be influenced to vote for a guilty verdict even if he/she had ‘reasonable doubt’ about what crime the defendant was actually guilty of.

The Defense Attorneys
The court appointed attorney that represented Derrick Frazier was Stephen A. Cihal, assisted by Elliot Costas. Cihal didn’t make his opening statement till at the end of the first week of the trial. He correctly pointed out that there was no physical evidence that placed Derrick inside the Nutt’s home where the murders had taken place, and he argued that the videotaped confession shouldn’t be allowed as evidence. Other than that his efforts to defend Derrick isn’t much to talk about. He did little or no investigation into the case. After the guilty verdict, he didn’t present any mitigating evidence in the punishment phase. Except for one phone call to Derrick’s grandmother, he didn’t have any contact with the family, and he didn’t talk to any friends of Derrick, or to any school teachers and other people that could have contributed with valuable information. He didn’t by any means live up to the standards one must expect a defense attorney to have, and he was literally completely unprepared - especially for the punishment phase.

Stephen A Cihal was under investigation for misconduct by the State Bar of Texas for another case, while he was working on Derrick’s case. The complaint against him was filed on March 16, 1998, at which time he was already Derrick Frazier’s court appointed attorney. He failed to response to the State Bar of Texas’ notice of the complaint timely in April the same year, and just two weeks after Derrick had been sentenced to death, The Grievance Committee for State Bar District No. 11C, had a hearing conducting complaints alleging certain acts of misconduct against Stephen A Cihal. Three months later, on January 14, 1999, the Grievance Committee noted that Mr. Cihal’s actions indicate a need for counseling and rehabilitation. The Committee’s opinion was that Mr. Cihal is guilty of professional misconduct and should be publicly reprimanded. A year later, in February 22, 2000, a complaint from another client claiming misconduct was made against Stephen A Cihal. This too he failed to respond to in due time. In May the same year, the Grievance Committee found just cause to believe that Cihal had committed acts of professional misconduct in this case too. Cihal was later suspended from practicing law for 90 days. He was also placed on probation for a period of 3 years, beginning June 1, 2001, and ending May 31, 2004, as he failed and refused to pay State Bar attorney’s fees and expenses, and refused to provide a detailed psychiatric report to the Professionalism Enhancement Program Committee, and refused to go before the same Professionalism Enhancement Program Committee.

In October of 2002, The Board of Disciplinary Appeals, stated: Stephen A Cihal has materially violated the terms and conditions of his probated suspension, and that he may be suffering from a disability as defined in the Texas Rules of Disciplinary Procedure Rule 1.06(H). Stephen A Cihal has represented other defenders that have received the death penalty after his suspension and parole was over. Elliot Costas represented Derrick Frazier at a hearing on January 18, 2006, in which an execution date was set for April 17. Costas had then not been involved in Derrick’s case in over 7 years and had no knowledge about writs and petitions that had been made in this time period, and he never contacted Derrick’s previous attorney for information. Bad legal representation for defendants in death penalty cases are not unusual, but in this case particular it can seem that the prosecution, lead by the very experienced District Attorney Michael Sheppard, had a very easy match.

The Confession
The videotaped confession, in which Derrick said he had killed Betsy Nutt, was the prosecution’s most important piece of evidence. And it was only after having watched this confession again, that the members of the jury decided on their verdict. They were not informed about this confession having been made only after Derrick had been offered a 30-year deal, and they certainly was not informed about the investigating officer Oscar Rivera, had forced Derrick to make this confession. Neither were they informed that he claimed to having been threatened and coerced into confessing. In the video that the jury was showed, Derrick waived his right to counsel, but other videotapes that the jury never saw exist too, and in one of these Derrick said “if I could afford one, I would”, when the interrogation officer explained his right to counsel and to have an attorney present. It is highly unbelievable that an experienced officer like Oscar Rivera did not understand the meaning of Derrick’s answer, and if he didn’t, it is very questionable that he was capable to understand more complex matters that such an interrogation and/or investigation would involve. Denying a defendant his constitutional right to have an attorney present during an interrogation is a breaking of American law, and evidence produced by using illegal means and methods, is not to be allowed as evidence in any court of law.

Physical findings
An analysis of a shoe print found on the Lucich ranch, matched the pattern of the sole of a Converse shoe worn by Derrick Frazier. However no unique characteristics were observed on this print or on Derrick’s shoe; and the analysis couldn’t conclude with the print having actually been made with the shoe that Derrick Frazier had worn that day. Also, the shoe was later found to belong to Mr. Lucich and so the possibility of Mr. Lucich having made this shoe print himself, is very possible. Analysis of two fingerprints found on the owner’s manual guide in Betsy Nutt’s Ford Pickup truck, were later identified as the left index and left middle fingerprints of Derrick Frazier. The owner’s manual was in the car when it was found in Victoria, Texas, several miles from the scene of the crime, and as no other fingerprints were found, this finding could only indicate that Derrick had touched the owner’s manual guide. It couldn’t even conclude with him having been inside the car, only that he had touched the manual guide, as no other fingerprints were found. Some items stolen from the Luchich’s home were found in Derrick’s possession. However, the murders of Betsy and Cody Nutt didn’t take place in the Luchich’s home, and therefore those findings do not connect Derrick to the murders in any way.

Derrick Frazier
Derrick Wayne Frazier was born on April 28, 1977 in Dallas, Texas. His mother was a drug addict and she at first tried to set Derrick up for adoption when he was born. For unknown reasons she decided to keep him. Derrick occasionally had some form of contact with his father, but it is unclear whether he knew that the man was actually his father. At the age of 5, Derrick’s mother brought him to her sister to stay for the weekend. She didn’t show up until a year after. Derrick’s older sister had been placed in custody of their grandmother, and Derrick often met her during this year with his aunt, but he didn’t know it was his sister and he assumed she was his cousin. It wasn’t till his mother suddenly appeared one day about a year later and demanded Derrick to come with her, that he found out that the girl he had learned to know as his cousin, was in fact his sister. Derrick’s aunt tried to prevent the boy being taken away from her as he had started school and he seemed to be happy with things as they were. But Derrick’s mother wouldn’t hear about that and as she was his mother and had the parental rights of her son, the boy was forced to go with her.

They were poor and they lived from hand to mouth. Derrick’s mother married a man, a preacher, that turned out to be very abusive and who often let his wife and her son starve. The marriage ended after only a few years, and Derrick’s mother started seeing lots of different men and continued her drug and alcohol abuse. They lived in a one-room apartment, and Derrick often witnessed his mother being with other men in their home. He watched his mother’s drug abuse, and he on several occasions witnessed sexual activity between his mother and her partners. He also witnessed the pain and agony she went through as she had breast cancer.

Derrick was sexually abused by a friend of the family at the age of twelve, and this traumatic experience(s) marked him for the rest of his life. The abuse was never reported to the police. At the age of fifteen, Derrick’s mother packed a few belongings and went out of town for the weekend. She never returned and Derrick waited alone in the apartment for a month before he realized she had abandoned him. He then contacted his aunt and asked if he could move in with her as his mother was gone. About a month after that again they were informed that his mother had been found dead of an overdose. Derrick couldn’t get over the fact that she had left him, and that he hadn’t even gotten a chance to say goodbye to her before she died. He was devastated and his personality changed. He got in trouble with the law and was ordered to seek treatment to handle his mother’s abandonment and death. He was later also sent to boot camp.

Comments
The childhood abuse was never mentioned during the trial and it is doubtful that the trial attorneys Stephen A Cihal and Elliot Costas, were even aware of Derrick’s troubled childhood as they never talked with anybody about it. The mental issues of Stephen A Cihal, and the fact that he was under investigation at the time he represented Derrick, the judge surely must have been aware of, but he failed to replace Cihal with a competent attorney, and the jury was never made aware of this. Derrick’s request to have an attorney present when saying “if I could afford one, I would” to Oscar Rivera when explained his rights, was ignored, something that one can only assume was ignored on purpose and against better knowing by the investigating officer, as he was far to experienced to not understand the true meaning of Derrick’s answer. None of Derrick’s family members were asked to take the stand in the trial, and they were not even questioned by either the defense attorneys or by the police investigators. Derrick’s juvenile records were not looked into by the defense attorneys.

The defense attorney never reported that one of the people that were called in as a witness had seen and heard that at least two of the jurors were friends of the victims’ family, and that one of the jurors actually had worked with one of the victims. The defense attorney never reported this to the appeal attorneys either. In later appeals the question of actual innocence has never been brought up. The trial attorney’s mental issues has never been brought up, and very little investigation has been made in this case until friends of Derrick a short time ago hired attorneys and investigators to look into some of these issues. There’s a lot of troubling issues in this case, but because of lack of funds only a very limited part of these things have been briefly looked into.

At the hearing on January 18, in which Derrick’s execution date was set for April 27, 2006, Derrick’s attorney were not there to represent him as he was away in Europe, and the judge refused to postpone the hearing till the 19th when Derrick’s attorney would have been back in the U.S. …time is running out…please support Derrick….

DeathRow-USA

August, 2006
Subject: World Press Release: An Innocent Man about to be Executed on Death Row

Press Release to the Media and the World by Texas Death Row Inmate Derrick Frazier #999284 aka Aksan Shakur and auhorized civil rights political activist Ricky Jason, to urgently inform Pope Benedict XVI, Martin Luther King III and the King Family, Stevie Wonder, icon activist Dick Gregory, Nelson Mandela, Oprah Winfrey, Bishop Tutu, Rev. Jesse Jackson, Rev. Al Sharpton, the Vatican, Minister Louis Farrakhan, and others.

Derrick Frazier has asked Ricky Jason on the names above to watch the state of Texas lynch an innocent man, just like they did Gary Graham aka Shaka Sankofa. Activist, SCLC Member, Ricky Jason, will be going in to visit Derrick Frazier to make an urgent report to the world and to the people listed above, to stop the lynching that will take place on April 27.

In the affidavit below, Derrick can prove his innocence. For more info, contact William Smith at (409) 350-7279.

FIGHT FOR FREEDOM GREETINGS EVERYONE!

I often try my best to be as open as possible with people. I have come to realize that sometimes that hurts and sometimes it helps. I must come to realize that all things will never be good for us all.

I am, to the government, Derrick Frazier #999284.To my closest friends, I am Hasan which is my name. I would like to welcome you to this site in hopes that you find it entertaining. Please allow me to tell you a bit about myself. My name in which I am accustomed to answering to is Hassan al-Shakur. I am a prisoner on Texas infamous Death Row. I have been imprisoned since 1997. Being incarcerated is really the wrong word to call it. I will just, call it what it is; this is a waiting room -where the people in it are waiting to be killed and slaughtered. But I am rushing to get out of this waiting room alive!

I am 27 years of age (almost) born on April the 28th, 1977 in Dallas, Texas.To this very day, I have faced so many adversities; one wonders how I am still living. It seems though that living is just, a big adversity. Though I am trapped within this waiting room, I am very concious of my situation. I wish to persue any and all avenues that would aid me in my given situation.

As a person, I am the father of De'von G. Frazier the love of my life. I am the baby brother of Cassundra L . Frazier. I am the grandson of Louise Provost and I am the nephew of Barbara Wright-Boyle. I am the founder of Operation L.I.F.E. (Love, Inspiration, Freedom, and Equality) which is a publication aimed at giving prisoners a forum to speak and be heard. I am currently writing a book that, will give further light to the world on what really goes on inside the prison complex named death row without the sugar coating it gets most of the time.

I am a member of an organization called Human Rights Coalition which is family oriented and prisoner ran. I am the founder of the Texas Chapter of this organization in which I established a newsletter for it as well. I work with getting people their rights back and even though this is very hard to do, I still take this challenge and fight for others as well as for myself.

I love to read and study. I read mostly non-fiction, biographies,political science and history but I am getting into the fiction as well and I enjoy the writings of Omar Tyree, Marcus Major, Eric Jerom Dickey to name a few. I love to write poetry and music and help people just better themselves all together.

By giving a piece of myself, I will always live on in the advent of my death. I do not consider myself average. I still have many high expectations and asperations which I must see reached. I would love to have a person that can stimulate my mind and help me overcome the adversity of living with death staring you right in the eyes everyday. Also stimulate my mind on life in general, and I know that I will do the same because even though my body is here, my mind is not here at all!

I would greatly appreciate your help along this horrid journey. Please know that I am not of arrogance and my heart is open to anyone who responds.Thank you for your understanding and your time.

Yours, Hasan al-Shakur http://www.hasanshakur.com/ (Derrick Frazier #999284)

Canadian Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty

Derrick Frazier
Death Row, Texas

Click here to read Hymns and Poetry by Derrick Frazier
Click here to read reports of abuses against death row prisoners

PLEASE WRITE !

Hi! I am fairly new here on Death Row in Texas. I have been here a little over 9 (nine) months, yet I am very self concious about my situation and would like to pursue any and all sources that will eventually aid me in my unfortunate situation. It may be certain individuals who will not want to start a link with a person such as myself. I hope that this will reach someone and hopefully help me regain the rights and life that was so abruptly taken from me. Let me give you some details about myself. I am 22 years of age. I am 6'0" in height and because I am such an athletic person, I weigh 180 pounds. I am a black male and I have a six (6) year old son. Before my untimely incarceration I was pursuing a career in the music industry. But due to the circumstances, my goal was never reached. I still write music for others to enjoy. I do not consider myself your average person on Death Row because of my mind (word obscured) thoughts and most of all my focus. I still have many dreams and aspirations and would love to talk / correspond with a person who I may be able to stimulate ideas and thoughts with not just concerning my unpredictable situation, but on world issues and life in general. I am sure I have a lot to share about my life and this place and what I have experienced since arriving here.

I would greatly appreciate your help in my journey. Without a doubt, I will be anxiously awaiting and hoping for a response. I imagine an arrogant person would request a certain person, but my heart is open to anyone whose heart is open also. I would like to thank you in advance !

Derrick Frazier 999884

Frazier v. Dretke, 145 Fed.Appx. 866 (5th Cir. 2006) (Habeas).

Background: Petitioner who was convicted of murder and sentenced to death sought writ of habeas corpus. The United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas denied relief. Petitioner sought certificate of appealability.

Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Prado, Circuit Judge, held that:
(1) occasional act of grace by state court in excusing or disregarding state procedural contemporaneous objection rule did not render rule inadequate, and thus, habeas corpus petitioner failed to establish that Texas contemporaneous objection rule did not apply to his case;
(2) petitioner failed to show cause for procedural default in failing to raise contemporaneous objection to state trial judge combining five theories alleged in indictment into a single submission for jury and submitting theories to jury in disjunctive manner;
(3) petitioner, who did not claim he was innocent of murder or advance any claim about innocence, failed to establish that failure to consider his claim that state trial judge combining five theories alleged in indictment into a single submission for jury would result in a miscarriage of justice, and thus, he failed to overcome procedural bar caused by his failure to raise contemporaneous objection; and
(4) petitioner failed to establish that counsel was ineffective in failing to present mitigating evidence. Application denied.

PRADO, Circuit Judge:
Derrick Frazier, a Texas inmate, was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death. Frazier seeks a certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal the district court's denial of his application for federal habeas relief. After considering that request, this court denies a COA.

Background of Frazier's Complaints

The indictment against Frazier charged him with committing capital murder under five different theories: The first paragraph alleged that Frazier murdered Betsy Nutt and Cody Nutt during the same criminal transaction; the second paragraph alleged that Frazier murdered Betsy Nutt in the course of robbing her; the third paragraph alleged that Frazier murdered Cody Nutt in the course of robbing Betsy Nutt; the fourth paragraph alleged that Frazier murdered Betsy Nutt in the course of burglarizing the home of Ron Lucich; and the fifth paragraph alleged that Frazier murdered Cody Nutt in the course of burglarizing Lucich's home. On direct appeal, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals summarized the evidence of Frazier's guilt as follows:

Michael Brown testified that, on the evening of June 25, 1997, he drove [Frazier] and Jermaine Herron to the Lucich home, which was located approximately ten miles from Refugio in the country. [Frazier] and Herron had been inside the place before and knew where guns were kept. In the car, [Frazier] and Herron discussed the plan for stealing the guns. The plan was that they would quickly retrieve the guns and kill anyone in the home. However, before they could enter the Lucich home, the lights came on. As a result, the three men drove away from the scene before commencing a burglary. The next morning, Brown drove [Frazier] and Herron back to the Lucich home, dropped them off, and drove away.

In his videotaped confession, [Frazier] narrated the following set of events occurring that morning. After burglarizing the Lucich home, [Frazier] and Herron took a pistol and went to the Nutt residence. Hiding the pistol, the two men approached Betsy Nutt, and Herron conversed with her. After this conversation, Betsy offered to take [Frazier] and Herron to Refugio. The three of them entered Betsy's pickup truck, but, as she started the engine, Betsy realized she had forgotten her mobile phone. She turned off the engine and went back inside her home to retrieve the phone. While Betsy was in her home, Herron told [Frazier] that “I'm going to do 'em now,” which [Frazier] took to mean that Herron was going to kill the home's occupants. [Frazier] responded, “It's your business.” When Betsy came back to her truck and started the engine, Herron told her that he needed to use the bathroom. Betsy told him that he could go inside and do so, and Herron entered the Nutt residence. Soon afterwards, Herron returned from the residence and told Betsy that she had a telephone call. Betsy exited the truck and entered her home, with [Frazier] following her. Once inside the Nutt home, Herron pointed the pistol at Betsy and told her not to move. Hearing the commotion, Cody Nutt [(Betsy's son)] came into the room occupied by [Frazier], Herron, and Betsy. Then Herron shot Cody with the pistol. After shooting Cody, Herron handed the gun to [Frazier] and told [Frazier] to shoot Betsy. Although he did not want to do it, [Frazier] shot Betsy twice. Both shots hit Betsy in the head. The first shot was from six to seven feet away while the second shot occurred when [Frazier] was standing over Betsy with the gun two or three feet away from her. Then Herron set the house on fire, and Herron and [Frazier] drove away in Betsy's truck.FN1

FN1. In his confession, Frazier explained that after he and Herron shot Betsy and Cody, they drove back to the Lucich residence in Betsy's truck, gathered up the property they had collected earlier, set fire to the Lucich residence, and then drove back to Refugio in Betsy's truck.

According to Brown's testimony, Herron later called Brown on the telephone. During their conversation, Herron told Brown that he (Herron) had killed a lady and a little boy. However, at a later date, when Brown and Herron were in jail, Herron told Brown that [Frazier] was the one who shot both persons. Upon hearing this evidence, the jury returned a guilty verdict. After the State presented its punishment evidence, the jury answered the three special punishment issues in the affirmative. Accordingly, the trial court imposed the death penalty. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Frazier's conviction. That court later denied Frazier's state habeas application. Subsequently, the district court denied Frazier's federal habeas application and his request for a COA. Frazier has asked this court for a COA on two issues.

* * *

Frazier's Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Claim

Frazier also maintains that his trial attorney was ineffective for failing to investigate his background and for failing to present mitigation evidence during the punishment phase of his trial. At trial, the prosecutor called several punishment witnesses who testified about Frazier's violent nature. Frazier's attorney, however, did not call any witnesses.

Frazier first complained about his attorney's failure to present mitigating evidence in his state habeas application. To support his complaint, Frazier presented affidavits from his grandmother and his aunt. In those affidavits, the affiants described how Frazier was abandoned by his mother when he was a teenager and how his mother died shortly thereafter. The affiants presented Frazier as a good child who was left alone by the death of his mother and who was dependent thereafter on his aunt for support. After considering the affidavits and the trial record, the state habeas court determined that Frazier's trial attorney actually presented the information contained in the affidavits by cross-examining the state's punishment witnesses, and thus concluded that the attorney was not ineffective in failing to present the mitigating evidence.

Frazier expanded his claim in his federal habeas proceeding. In the district court, Frazier argued that his trial attorney was unreasonable for failing to investigate the possibility that Frazier's family and friends could have provided evidence that could have resulted in a life sentence in lieu of the death penalty. Frazier maintained that his trial attorney failed to investigate numerous mitigating factors: beatings with a belt by his step-father; his adaptability to prison life as evidenced by good behavior and obtaining a GED; his involvement as a child in his church and community; his reputation among his school teachers, school administrators, and coaches; the neighborhood in which he was reared; whether he was a leader or a follower; his substance abuse; and potential emotional problems caused by the death of his mother. Frazier supported his claim with eighteen affidavits which presented Frazier as a loving and well-behaved child who went bad only after he lost his mother. Frazier also presented a mitigation prospectus in which a mitigation expert opined that “there were factors present in the life of Mr. Frazier which were not investigated and which might be shown to be mitigating factors to the crime.”

Considering Frazier's expanded claim, the district court observed that Frazier's federal claim asserts a “legal argument and evidentiary support that fundamentally differs from that evidence anticipated by his state claim” and determined that Frazier had not exhausted his claim to the extent that it exceeded the evidence presented in state court. As for the exhausted portion of the claim, the district court determined that the state habeas court's resolution of the claim was reasonable based on the evidence presented to the state habeas court. The court explained that although a reasonable attorney making a prudent investigation into Frazier's background would have uncovered a great deal of potentially mitigating evidence, nothing indicated that the result of the proceeding would have been different had the attorney presented a mitigation case.

Frazier seeks a COA to challenge the district court's resolution of his ineffective assistance of counsel claim. In seeking a COA, Frazier criticizes the state habeas court for not focusing on the reasonableness of the investigation supporting his trial attorney's decision to not introduce mitigating evidence. Frazier relies on Wiggins v. SmithFN28 where the Supreme Court explained that the focus in an ineffective assistance claim is not on whether counsel should have presented a mitigation case, but rather on whether the investigation supporting counsel's decision not to introduce mitigating evidence was itself reasonable.FN29 Frazier, however, does not address the issue of exhaustion, except to emphasize that the district court struggled in reaching its determination. Because Wiggins did not change the requirement that a petitioner must exhaust his state court remedies FN30 or the requirements for demonstrating ineffective assistance of counsel,FN31 Frazier cannot show that reasonable jurists would debate the district court's treatment of his claim.

FN28. 539 U.S. 510, 123 S.Ct. 2527, 156 L.Ed.2d 471 (2003). FN29. Wiggins, 539 U.S. at 522, 123 S.Ct. 2527. FN30. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1). FN31. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

First, reasonable jurists would not debate the district court's determination that Frazier did not exhaust his federal habeas claim.FN32 “A federal habeas petitioner must exhaust state remedies before he can obtain federal habeas relief.”FN33 To exhaust a claim in state court, a petitioner must fairly present the substance of the claim to the state court.FN34 A petitioner fails to satisfy the exhaustion requirement where he “ ‘advances in federal court an argument based on a legal theory distinct from that relied upon in the state court.’ ”FN35 He also fails to satisfy the exhaustion requirement if he “presents newly discovered evidence or other evidence not before the state courts such as to place the case in a significantly different and stronger evidentiary posture than it was when the state courts considered it.”FN36

FN32. See Slack, 529 U.S. at 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595 (requiring a petitioner who challenges the district court's determination that a claim is procedurally barred to show that reasonable jurists would find it debatable whether the court was correct in its procedural ruling). FN33. Carey v. Saffold, 536 U.S. 214, 220, 122 S.Ct. 2134, 153 L.Ed.2d 260 (2002). FN34. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1). FN35. Wilder v. Cockrell, 274 F.3d 255, 259 (5th Cir.2001) (citations omitted). FN36. Brown v. Estelle, 701 F.2d 494, 495 (5th Cir.1983).

Here, Frazier presented an evidentiary basis for his federal claim that was significantly different from the evidence he presented in state court. In state court, Frazier complained about his attorney's failure to present a mitigation case and contended that his attorney failed to investigate any possible aggravating factors presented by the state. In federal court, he complained about the unreasonableness of the investigation that served as the basis for his attorney's decision not to present a mitigation case. Although the legal theories he relied on in state court are essentially the same theories he advanced in federal court, Frazier presented a significantly different evidentiary basis for his federal claim. The brief affidavits he presented in state court present Frazier as a good boy who was abandoned by his mother and left dependent on his aunt for assistance. The eighteen affidavits supporting his federal claim present much more. The affidavits describe a well-behaved and sweet child who was very involved in his church and performed well in school, but got involved with drugs and a bad crowd after his mother died. The affidavits describe Frazier's poor family social history, unstable home life, good school performance, and non-violent nature. Together, the federal affidavits suggest that Frazier's criminal conduct was due to bad friends, drugs, a troubled and abusive childhood, living in the projects, a follower's mentality, and psychological issues. This information was not presented to the state court and places Frazier's case in a significantly different and stronger evidentiary posture than it was when the state court considered it. Although a habeas petitioner may under some circumstances present evidence that was not presented to the state court, evidence that places his claim “in a significantly different legal posture must first be presented to the state courts.” FN37 The affidavits Frazier presented in the district court do not merely supplement the information presented to the state court; instead, they present numerous mitigating factors that were not presented to the state court. As a result, the district court's procedural ruling that Frazier failed to exhaust his claim is correct. Thus, Frazier's claim is barred to the extent that it exceeds the evidentiary basis presented in state court. FN37. Anderson v. Johnson, 338 F.3d 382, 386-87 (5th Cir.2003) (internal quotations omitted).

Second, reasonable jurists would not debate the district court's resolution of Frazier's unexhausted claim-that his attorney was ineffective for failing to present mitigation witnesses. To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, a criminal defendant must show that his attorney's assistance was deficient and that the deficiency prejudiced him.FN38 “To establish deficient performance, a petitioner must demonstrate that counsel's representation ‘fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.’ ” FN39 “In any case presenting an ineffectiveness claim, the performance inquiry must be whether counsel's assistance was reasonable considering all the circumstances.”FN40 To show prejudice, the defendant must show a reasonable probability that, absent his attorney's error, the jury would have concluded that the balance of aggravating and mitigating circumstances did not warrant the death sentence.FN41

FN38. Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052; Hopkins v. Cockrell, 325 F.3d 579, 586 (5th Cir.2003). FN39. See Wiggins, 539 U.S. at 522, 123 S.Ct. 2527 (quoting Strickland, 466 U.S. at 688, 104 S.Ct. 2052). FN40. Strickland, 466 U.S. at 688, 104 S.Ct. 2052. FN41. Id. at 695, 104 S.Ct. 2052.

The state habeas judge determined that Frazier's attorney was not deficient-the first part of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel-but the district court was troubled by the lack of an explanation for why the attorney failed to investigate the possibility that family members could provide mitigation evidence. Faced with the numerous affidavits Frazier presented with his federal habeas petition, the district court questioned the reasonableness of the attorney's performance, but determined that Frazier could not show that the result of his trial would have been different even if the attorney had called mitigation witnesses. Although the district court resolved this claim without making a determination about deficient performance, the state judge's determination that the attorney was not deficient was not an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law for determining whether an attorney's performance was deficient.FN42 The trial attorney's cross-examination of state punishment witness Courtney La Font revealed that Frazier's mother had abandoned him when he was 15 and that his mother died shortly afterwards. La Font explained that his mother's death left Frazier feeling hurt, confused, and alone. She stated that Frazier lived periodically with his father and his aunt when his mother was still living and that he started using drugs. This information is essentially the same information that was presented in the affidavits of Frazier's grandmother and aunt. FN42. See Pondexter v. Dretke, 346 F.3d 142, 145 (5th Cir.2003) (explaining that a petitioner seeking habeas relief based on ineffective assistance of counsel must show that the state court's adjudication of his claim constitutes an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law).

In addition, the attorney's cross-examination of two other state punishment witnesses showed that Frazier had previously completed a boot-camp program without disciplinary action and that Frazier earned his GED while incarcerated. This testimony evidenced the possibility that Frazier could be incarcerated without posing a danger to others. Thus, Frazier's trial attorney presented mitigation evidence.

As for the second part of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel, reasonable jurists would not debate the correctness of the district court's determination that nothing indicated that the result of Frazier's trial would have been different. The state presented several punishment witnesses who testified about various violent acts committed by Frazier. This testimony revealed that Frazier was a gang member, robbed a man at age 15, raped his girlfriend at age 16, committed an aggravated assault at age 17, was convicted for unlawfully carrying a weapon while he was on probation at age 18, and assaulted a 17-year-old at age 20. The state's punishment evidence indicated that Frazier engaged in repeated and escalating acts of violent behavior and that efforts to rehabilitate him failed.

The evidence portrayed Frazier as a violent person who poses a danger to others. Yet nothing in either the affidavits presented to the state court-or even in the plethora of affidavits presented to the federal court, were they, contrary to this opinion, to be considered-suggests that the jury would have considered a life sentence in lieu of the death penalty. As the district court observed, “[t]he instability of Frazier's childhood and his good nature as a youth, when compared to the violent life he chose to live and failed to reform, would not call for a reasonable probability of a different result.” Thus, no reasonable probability exists that, had Frazier's attorney called Frazier's grandmother and aunt as mitigation witnesses, the jury would have returned a life sentence. Frazier has not demonstrated that reasonable jurists would debate the correctness of the district court's resolution of his claim. As a result, he is not entitled to a COA on his ineffective assistance of counsel claim.

Conclusion

Because Frazier has not shown that reasonable jurists would debate the district court's resolution of his claims, the court DENIES Frazier's request for a COA. APPLICATION DENIED.