Attorney: Killer was delusional

Wednesday, Sept. 14, 2005 | 9:21 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- An attorney told the Nevada Supreme Court on Tuesday that death row inmate Alfonso "Slinkey" Blake was "so delusional that he did not know right from wrong" when he killed two young women and critically wounded another in Las Vegas.

Robert Miller of the Clark County public defender's office argued that District Judge Sally Loehrer mishandled the trial and that the conviction should be overturned.

But Chief Deputy District Attorney Robert Daskas said Blake had no history of mental illness and there was "nothing to show that he snapped" when he fatally shot Sophear Choy, 19, and Priscilla Van Dine, 23, on March 5, 2003. Blake was also convicted of wounding Kim Choy, 23, who was shot twice in the head.

Daskas said the motive was greed for Blake, an aspiring singer who was living with three topless dancers who were giving him $40,000 a month. He said Blake recruited the three victims to rent another house from him. The Choy women were dancers at strip clubs and Van Dine was a friend.

When the Choys and Van Dine pulled out of the rental agreement, a dispute arose and Blake walked with the three into a desert area in southwest Las Vegas where he shot them.

Miller said the testimony at trial by psychiatrist Dr. Louis Mortillaro was enough to raise the defense of legal insanity. Mortillaro said Blake had a brief psychotic disorder and had difficulty in knowing right from wrong.

But Chief Justice Nancy Becker challenged Miller, saying she did not see any basis for an insanity plea.

Mortillaro also testified that Blake did not have a violent nature. But Daskas, who was the trial attorney, asked the psychiatrist if he knew about six prior instances in which Blake hit another man with a baseball bat, hit several women and stabbed a person. Mortillaro said he did not know about those incidents when he examined Blake.

Miller said those instances should not have been allowed into evidence. He said Loehrer should have ordered a hearing to determine the validity of those instances.

"Evidence of prior bad acts are not admissible" argued Miller, unless there was a hearing to determine if they really occurred.

Daskas replied that the questioning was perfectly permissible. He said the questions where to show that Blake did not suffer from a brief psychotic incident when he shot the three women and also to counter the testimony that Blake was not violent.

The court took the arguments under submission and will rule later.