Supreme Court to hear Murphy, Tabish appeals

Wednesday, June 26, 2002 | 11:04 a.m.

The Nevada Supreme Court on Thursday will hear arguments on whether to overturn the convictions of Sandy Murphy and Rick Tabish in the slaying of wealthy gambling figure Ted Binion.

The hearing, to be televised live at 9 a.m. on Las Vegas ONE, comes two years after Murphy and Tabish, in the area's highly publicized criminal trial, were found guilty of pumping Binion with drugs and suffocating him at his 2408 Palomino Lane home.

Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz, an appeals specialist who has handled many high-profile cases, is expected to argue on Murphy's behalf during the hour-long hearing. Las Vegas attorney William Terry will represent Tabish, and Chief Deputy District Attorneys David Roger and David Wall will defend the convictions.

Murphy, 30, Binion's live-in girlfriend, is serving a minimum of 22 years in prison, and Tabish, a 37-year-old Montana contractor, is spending at least 25 years behind bars.

Roger predicted the prosecution ultimately would prevail at the high court.

"Typically the Supreme Court gives great deference to the jurors who spent a great deal of time listening to the facts and arriving at a verdict," Roger said. "They also give great deference to the trial judge who was in the trenches.

"Therefore I think that the defense has an uphill battle in securing the release of their clients."

But Murphy's Nevada lawyer, Herb Sachs, said the defense is feeling good about its chances of overturning the convictions.

"We're very confident that the issues we presented in our brief are viable issues, and we're right on the law," said Sachs, who also will participate in the Supreme Court hearing.

Defense lawyers expect to argue that presiding District Judge Joseph Bonaventure should have granted Murphy and Tabish separate trials. Murphy believes her defense was harmed at the 2000 trial when prosecutors presented evidence related to additional charges against Tabish.

But Wall said Bonaventure went out of his way to warn the jury not to consider that evidence.

The judge, defense lawyers contend, also should not have allowed the jury to reach a unanimous verdict about how the 55-year-old Binion died.

Jurors were told they could return a guilty verdict if they believed the former Horseshoe executive either died of a forced drug overdose or was suffocated at his posh Las Vegas home on Sept. 17, 1998.

Chief Medical Examiner Lary Simms testified for the prosecution that Binion was given lethal doses of heroin and Xanax. But another prosecution witness, widely known forensics expert Michael Baden, suggested that Binion was the victim of burking, a method of suffocating someone with a hand or pillow without leaving marks on the face.

Wall said there is plenty of case law that shows a jury, if it believes the a homicide was committed, does not have to be unanimous in the cause of death.

Defense attorneys also expect to argue that the jury committed misconduct by relying on information not introduced as evidence when making its decision.

Terry described the verdict in court briefs last July as being "tainted to its core" because of the allegations of jury misconduct.

But Wall said it already has been demonstrated in court that the jury conducted itself properly.

He also said Bonaventure handled the trial, which was televised locally and nationally, in an exemplary fashion.

"We are comfortable that Judge Bonaventure did an excellent job ruling on the legal issues," Wall said.

"There is no question in our minds that Tabish and Murphy got a fair trial, and there isn't anything they raise in their briefs that would warrant a new trial."

The Supreme Court is expected to issue an opinion in the case within the next several months.