The Akron Legal News

Life imprisonment stands for murderer who sought vengeance

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: August 27, 2013

The 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals recently affirmed the judgment of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio convicting a man who concocted and executed a plan to exact vengeance for a drug deal gone awry.

Dwayne Davis was convicted by a jury of traveling interstate to further an unlawful enterprise, using a firearm to commit murder during and in relation to a crime of violence and tampering with evidence. He was sentenced to life in prison. The charges stemmed from the October 2008 shooting deaths of Robert Susko and David Miller in Detroit.

Davis appealed his conviction and sentence, asserting that the district court improperly denied his motions to suppress, that his trial should have been held in Michigan, and that a life sentence for a mentally disabled homicide offender violated the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment.

According to the appellate court’s summary of the case, Davis contacted Robert Susko in September 2008, asking him to procure some cocaine. To fulfill the request, Susko turned to Paul Gonzalez. The two delivered the product to Davis, who then sold it to Tim Smith.

Smith, however, was not happy with the quality of the product. When Davis complained to Susko and Gonzalez, Gonzalez indicated that “there would be no reimbursement.”

Later, Davis told Smith, “No one rips me off, I’ll kill those guys, no one plays me like a sucker.”

Davis convinced Susko to join him on a trip from Cleveland to Detroit where he intended to buy marijuana; Gonzalez declined the invitation. The two would-be traffickers found a driver in Susko’s friend, David Miller.

According to cellphone records, Susko’s last call was made in Detroit at 11:04 p.m. near the place where he was later found dead along with Miller. Shortly thereafter, the phone records indicated that Davis exchanged 20 phones calls with an associate, while a final call was made by Davis with Susko’s phone to leave a voicemail for another associate.

The Detroit Police Department received a call the next morning at 4:11 a.m. reporting that two bodies were found in the street. Police found a bullet in each victim’s head and forensic analysis revealed that they were fired from the same gun.

An autopsy concluded that the men had been killed execution style.

In the meantime, Davis had a friend to pick him up in Detroit and help him set fire to Miller’s vehicle. The car was eventually recovered by police and blood samples found inside were matched to Susko and Miller.

A couple of days later, Davis met Ross at a bar and said, “I told you I was going to get them.” He then bragged and repeated the story to Ross and others in the bar, including his girlfriend.

In November 2009, while Davis was incarcerated for an unrelated firearms violation, the FBI executed an active federal arrest warrant for carjacking.

According to the agent executing the warrant, Davis was read his Miranda rights and then willingly confessed to the events that led to the deaths of Susko and Miller. The agent reduced the confession to writing, explained and read the draft to Davis, allowed Davis to make changes and had Davis sign the written confession.

Davis filed a motion to suppress the confession on the grounds the FBI agent continued to question him despite his invocation of the right to an attorney.

He also filed a motion to dismiss the case for improper venue, arguing that Michigan, the scene of the murder, was the proper location for the trial.

The court denied both motions and the trial court ultimately sentenced Davis to life imprisonment.

Upon appeal, the 6th Circuit agreed with the district court’s decision to deny the motions.

Davis claimed that the district court should have suppressed an inculpatory statement he made to the FBI agent.

“Davis’ statement was never admitted into evidence at trial,” wrote Judge Bernice Donald for the 6th Circuit’s three-judge panel. “Therefore, we consider Davis’ challenge moot.”

Judge Donald continued, “We are similarly unmoved by Davis’ venue argument.”

The appellate panel cited Title 18, which provides, “Any offense against the U.S. begun in one district and completed in another, or committed in more than one district, may be inquired of and prosecuted in any district in which such offense was begun, continued, or completed.”

In Davis’ case, the appeals court found that he crossed state lines with intent to commit a crime of violence.

“The fact that he started his journey from Cleveland makes the Northern District of Ohio a proper venue for prosecution under the Travel Act,” held Judge Donald.

The panel then turned to Davis’ claim that his life sentence was cruel and unusual punishment, in support of which he cited two Supreme Court cases: Miller v. Alabama and Atkins v. Virginia.

Davis claimed that the two cases, read together, would suggest “that those with limited intellectual capacity cannot be subjected to the harshest penalties our society imposes.”

Judge Donald again found his argument to be less than persuasive: “Davis asks us to engage in Eighth Amendment alchemy by melding Miller and Atkins together to fashion some sort of alloyed case law that would shield him from a life sentence.”

The appellate panel declined to do so and, in the end, affirmed Davis’ conviction and sentence.

Judges Karen Moore and Jeffrey Sutton joined Donald to form the majority.

The case is cited United States v. Davis, Case No. 11-3472.

[Back]