USA - Louisiana. A federal judge overturned a 20-year-old murder conviction in a death penalty case.

A federal judge overturned a 20-year-old murder conviction last week in a death penalty case. U.S. District Court Judge Dee Drell, sitting in Alexandria, granted the petition from Willard Allen, 56, who was convicted of murdering Herman Ferguson during an armed robbery on Sept. 7, 1993. Drell found the seating of an admittedly biased juror violated Allen's Sixth Amendment rights to an impartial jury. Drell also found that the failure of Allen's attorney to question the juror violated Allen's rights to effective counsel. Drell remanded the case to the 10th Judicial District in Natchitoches Parish with instructions to hold a bail hearing within 45 days. The state has 270 days to retry Allen or must release him from prison. Herman Ferguson was killed during the robbery of a night club. Allen was convicted of first degree murder in a one-day trial in October 1994 and sentenced to death. In Allen's petition for writ of habeas corpus, 17 grounds are raised for overturning his conviction. Drell concurred with 2 of them, both relating to the seating of juror James Chester. During jury questioning, Chester told the prosecutor he socialized with members of the Natchitoches Parish Sheriff's Office - the agency investigating the killing of Ferguson. He said he knew "pretty much everything" about the case and had formed an opinion about it. When asked by the prosecutor if he could put all that aside and act without bias, Chester did not give a clear answer and seemed to indicate he would use his prior knowledge and opinions as a juror. In an affidavit 5 years later, Chester said "I formed an opinion that Mr. Allen deliberately and intentionally robbed and killed Herman Ferguson. I made up my mind that this was true prior to being selected for the jury." In the same affidavit, Chester said he was amazed he was selected for the jury. Allen's attorney at the time, James Calhoun, did not challenge Chester as a juror and did not ask him a single question about his relationship with law enforcement officers, what information he acquired from them and what opinions he had formed as a result.