JUSTICES ORDER DEATH-SENTENCE REVIEW

Dallas Man, Once Days From Being
Executed, Could Get New Hearing

A Dallas man who came within four days of execution for the 1989
slayings of a North Dallas woman and her grandson will have his case
reviewed by an appeals court because of instructions given to the jury
during the death penalty phase, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday.

The issue is whether jurors who convicted Mark Allen Robertson of
capital murder in 1991 were adequately instructed about how to
consider details of his background such as his drug addiction and
history of abuse as a child when they were deciding whether to
sentence him to death.

The case will now be considered by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals. If the court rules that jurors were not properly instructed,
Mr. Robertson could receive a new punishment hearing to determine
whether he should be sentenced to life in prison or to death.

The appeals court could also find that the jury instructions did not
harm Mr. Robertson and uphold his death sentence. A hearing on the
matter has not been scheduled.

Mr. Robertson's attorney, Randy Schaffer, said the court's ruling was
a significant victory.

"You take it a day at a time," he said.

Last month, the Supreme Court granted Mr. Robertson a temporary
reprieve four days before his May 22 execution date. Prosecutors and
defense attorneys say the court ruling is directly related to a
similar legal issue involving another Texas inmate.

In a case involving retarded Texas inmate Johnny Paul Penry, attorneys
argued that jurors were not given clear guidelines for considering his
retardation and childhood abuse. The justices voted last week to
overturn Penry's death sentence.

Dallas County prosecutors said the court's ruling was not surprising
because of its link to the Penry case. But Assistant District Attorney
Kim Schaefer said Mr. Robertson's circumstances are significantly
different from Mr. Penry's and probably will not be overturned by the
appeals court.

"In Penry, there was severe mental retardation," she said. "Because we
don't have that in the Robertson case, we don't think the outcome will
be affected."

Mr. Robertson's death sentence was handed down during a period from
1989 through 1991 when Texas judges did not have clear guidelines for
instructing juries on how to consider special circumstances ñ such as
Mr. Penry's retardation and Mr. Robertson's troubled childhood ñ in
their death penalty deliberations.

Lacking guidelines, judges often told juries that if they did not want
to impose the death penalty for any reason, they should answer 'no' to
the standard questions regarding whether a defendant acted
deliberately or posed a threat to society. Lawmakers clarified the
statute in 1991.

"That's contrary to the way we instruct jurors," Mr. Schaffer
said.

In a recent interview, Mr. Robertson expressed remorse for the fatal
shootings of 81-year-old Edna Brau and her 19-year-old grandson, Sean
Hill, at her Preston Hollow home. Mr. Robertson also killed a 7-Eleven
clerk during a robbery 10 days earlier.

He said the slayings occurred at a time when he was a heavy drug user
and was not thinking about the consequences of his actions. Since his
conviction, Mr. Robertson said he has educated himself and has
changed. He learned to read and write in German and studies philosophy
and translates poems, he said.

Relatives of the victims said Monday that they are disappointed by the
court ruling. Ms. Brau's son, John Brau, said the delays are
frustrating given the solid evidence that led to a conviction.

"It's not a circumstantial case," he said. "How much evidence does it
take to make a legitimate conviction? What does society want?"