DA: Dismiss Rodgers petition

Inmate challenging conviction in 1988 stabbing death of Pasquale Lascoli

Blair County District Attorney Pete Weeks and his First Assistant Nichole M. Smith have asked the federal court in Johnstown to dismiss a petition filed on behalf of an Altoona man who has been in prison for almost 35 years for the stabbing death of a retired railroad worker that occurred during a home invasion robbery.

James Franklin Rodgers was a 17-year-old juvenile in June 1988 when police say he entered the Altoona home of Pasquale "Patsy" Lascoli, 72, and ultimately killed him by stabbing him more than 70 times.

During the ensuing investigation, blood evidence was recovered from one of the victim's pants pockets, where he kept his wallet, linking Rodgers to the crime.

In 1988, the use of DNA evidence was a new science, and the Rodgers case was among the first in Pennsylvania to utilize such evidence to track a killer.

The use of DNA evidence was so novel at the time that trial judge, Ellis W. Van Horn Jr., held a weeklong hearing to determine if DNA was scientifically acceptable and could be admitted in the upcoming trial.

Van Horn ruled for the prosecution and the DNA was used to place Rodgers at the scene of the crime.

Rodgers, a juvenile with a record that already included 13 crimes, was arrested in July 1988 and on May 23, 1990, was found guilty of first degree murder, robbery, aggravated assault, theft by unlawful taking and receiving stolen property.

He received a mandatory sentence of life without parole.

Throughout the years, Rodgers, through multiple attorneys, has unsuccessfully challenged his conviction and sentence.

In 2016, however, the U.S. Supreme Court in Miller v. Alabama, determined that mandatory life without parole imposed on a juvenile violated the constitutional bar against cruel and unusual punishment and in 2017, Rodgers' life sentence was vacated.

After three days of hearings, Judge Daniel L. Howsare, issued a new sentence of 40 years to life.

Disappointed by the sentence, Rodgers, through his attorney, Kirk J. Henderson, a federal public defender, activated a federal lawsuit that had been stayed years ago, challenging Rodgers' conviction.

The defense contends Rodgers did not receive a fair trial in 1990, pointing out the evidence at the scene showed other people were in the Lascoli residence at the time of the crime -- that Rodgers was not linked to the scene through blood samples on the wall, or by fingerprints, bloody footprints or a piece of chewing gum.

The defense, in its petition for federal review, noted that even the bloody fingerprint on the victim's wallet, found in Prospect Park days after the killing, was not from Rodgers.

The defense criticized the evidence collection procedures used by police and charged Rodgers' rights were violated during the investigation, in which he was questioned without being advised of his right to have an attorney present.

With respect to the trial, the defense is arguing that Rodgers' attorney had personal issues at the time and was ineffective.

Last Thursday, the Blair DA answered the defense.

Weeks and Smith contend that many of the claims of ineffective counsel have not been fully vetted in the state courts, a necessary prerequisite that waives the issues before the federal court.

One of the complaints by the defense that remains was trial counsel's failure to object when the court allowed what is now called Exhibit 205 to go with the jury as it deliberated.

That exhibit was a summary of the evidence and other details of the investigation that also included the fact that Rodgers had been involved in a robbery as a juvenile.

The prosecution attorneys point out this issue has been examined in detail during post-trial proceedings and emphasized that eight of the jurors in the case were summoned during a special hearing and asked if that exhibit impacted the verdict.

The commonwealth stated, "It is respectfully submitted that the (Blair) court and the Superior Court correctly determined that regarding the sole issue preserved for review, (the defense) failed to demonstrate (Rodgers) was actually prejudiced by the introduction of Exhibit 205."

Also, defense charges that prosecutorial misconduct prejudiced the jury against Rodgers during his trial. They, too, have been aired before the Blair County Court and the state appellate courts, according to the commonwealth's argument.

The commonwealth in its answer stated, "There are no errors in the court's logic that necessitates disturbing a 30-year-old conviction and eviscerating the authority of both state courts that decided it."

As to the charge that police began questioning Rodgers about cuts on his hands without advising him of his rights to remain silent and have an attorney present, the prosecution argued that when the questioning occurred, Rodgers was not a suspect in the Lascoli homicide, but was being interviewed with respect to another incident.

The detective interviewing Rodgers noticed "open lacerations" on his left hand.

Detective Mitchel Cooper was at that point cataloging the cuts "as was-and-should-be required of any conscientious law enforcement officer," according to the answer prepared by Weeks and Smith.

It was explained the questioning occurred at a time prior to Rodgers becoming a suspect in the Lascoli homicide.

The defense is asking that Rodgers' 1990 conviction for killing Lascoli be vacated.

The commonwealth opposes the request.

The commonwealth, in answering the defense petition, submitted almost 1,000 pages of documentation associated with the trial.

The case, assigned to U. S. District Judge Stephanie L. Haines in Johnstown, will first undergo a review conducted by U.S. Magistrate Judge Kezia O.L. Taylor in Pittsburgh.