A Mobile County capital murder case that has wound through Alabama courts for more than a decade is headed back before the state’s highest criminal appeals court this fall, as prosecutors challenge a lower court ruling that granted a new trial to a man convicted in a 2000 stabbing death in West Mobile.
The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals is scheduled to hear oral arguments on Oct. 15 in the case of William Ziegler, who was convicted in the killing of Allen Baker and sentenced to death. The hearing centers on an order issued last year by Mobile County Circuit Judge Sarah Stewart, who found that Ziegler’s constitutional rights were violated at multiple stages of his prosecution and ordered that he receive a new trial.
The Alabama Attorney General’s Office is asking the appellate panel to reverse Stewart’s ruling, arguing in a lengthy brief filed earlier this year that the trial judge overstepped in finding that prosecutors withheld exculpatory evidence, that Ziegler’s trial and appellate attorneys were ineffective, and that misconduct during jury selection tainted the outcome of his trial.
Stewart’s order followed a 2010 evidentiary hearing held under Rule 32 of the Alabama Rules of Criminal Procedure, which allows capital defendants to raise certain claims after their direct appeals have been exhausted. During that hearing, a team of attorneys representing Ziegler called 24 witnesses and presented more than 600 pieces of evidence, arguing that the original investigation was compromised by a conflict of interest, that witnesses had changed their accounts over time, and that Ziegler’s original defense team failed to adequately investigate or defend the case.
Stewart also found that Ziegler’s jury included two members whose backgrounds should have disqualified them from service — one who had previously served on a jury that recommended a death sentence in an unrelated case, and another whose cousin and brother-in-law had both been victims of homicide. In her written order, Stewart concluded that Ziegler’s trial had been compromised by a combination of due process violations, deficient legal representation and jury selection problems, writing that he was entitled to a new trial “under any analysis.”
During the Rule 32 hearing, one witness, Vicky Bosarge, recanted testimony she had given at Ziegler’s original trial. Bosarge had previously testified that she overheard Ziegler refer to Baker as a “walking dead man” before his death. At the 2010 hearing, she said she had not actually heard Ziegler make the statement and could not identify who had. Two other witnesses testified that Ziegler was not present when the comment was allegedly made.
State prosecutors have pushed back forcefully on Stewart’s findings. In their brief, attorneys for the state argue that Bosarge’s recantation should not have been credited, describing her testimony at the Rule 32 hearing as inconsistent and noting she had little to gain by implicating Ziegler in the first place. The state also argues that questions about a car belonging to co-defendant Jay Bennett, which a creditor testified contained blood after it was repossessed, should not have factored into the Rule 32 proceedings because the issue was not raised during Ziegler’s original trial or his direct appeal.
According to testimony presented at trial, Baker was beaten inside an apartment before being stabbed to death in nearby woods. Investigators who worked the case have said the location where Baker’s body was discovered appeared inconsistent with the initial account of the killing, based on the limited amount of blood found there. Statements from witnesses evolved over the course of the investigation, initially implicating Bennett and another man, William Randall, before eventually identifying Ziegler as the person who stabbed Baker.
Ziegler and his girlfriend at the time, Patricia Davis, both acknowledged striking Baker but maintained that he left the scene alive with Bennett and Randall. The confrontation took place during a Mardi Gras party at the apartment, which was also attended by two other witnesses whose accounts became central to the case.
One of those witnesses was a teenager who was the niece of a Mobile County Sheriff’s Office detective who responded to the initial missing persons report involving Baker. That detective’s investigation led him to Bennett, who directed him to Baker’s body near Ziegler’s apartment. The detective was later removed from the case, but not before speaking with his niece about what she had seen. Stewart’s order noted that the niece gave several different statements about the night in question, and that the detective’s involvement raised questions about whether the investigation had been properly directed.
The Attorney General’s Office, in its roughly 168-page brief, disputes nearly every element of Stewart’s ruling, including her findings on the effectiveness of Ziegler’s trial and appellate counsel and the process used to select his jury. Legal observers note that Ziegler’s previous direct appeals were rejected by both the Court of Criminal Appeals and the Alabama Supreme Court, making his successful Rule 32 petition a comparatively rare outcome.
Ziegler remains held at Holman Correctional Facility while the case moves through the appeals process. His mother, Odella Wilson, said the family was relieved by Stewart’s ruling but remains cautious given the state’s continued efforts to overturn it. She said her son has grown frustrated watching the case stretch on for years, and that she believes the evidence presented at the Rule 32 hearing raised serious doubts about his conviction.
October’s arguments before the Court of Criminal Appeals are expected to be largely procedural, with each side given 30 minutes to present its case. A ruling is not expected during the hearing itself, and attorneys familiar with the appeals process caution that a final decision could still be months or years away.