Killer vies to vacate 60-year sentence

Cramm attorney claims verdicts were unfair and asks court for a new trial

By Jim Haley

Herald Writer

SEATTLE -- The sounds of a fistfight echoed through a quiet south Everett neighborhood on May 30, 2000.

Then there was a barrage of gunfire.

When the smoke cleared, two teenagers who had come to watch the fight were dead and a third, then 17-year-old Dennis James Cramm, had started down a road that would take him to two first-degree murder convictions and a 60-year prison sentence.

Now, an attorney claims that Cramm was unfairly convicted and the jury verdict should be thrown out.

Lawyer Tom Conom on Friday also told a three-judge panel of the state Court of Appeals in Seattle that it should send the case back to Snohomish County for a new trial only on manslaughter charges in the deaths of Jason Thompson and Jesse Stoner, both 18, of Everett.

Cramm argued that he acted in defense of his father, Dale Cramm, when he fired about a dozen shots in the

direction of and through a brown Honda that was leaving the area after the fight broke up.

Cramm claimed at his trial that he had been shooting at another man who had been firing a pistol and using the Honda as a shield.

He also claimed he had no intention of shooting Thompson and Stoner.

Jurors found in 2001 that there were five teenagers in the Honda, including Stoner and Thompson. They agreed with prosecutors that the shooting showed extreme indifference to human life and convicted Cramm, even though he may not have intended to harm the victims specifically.

On Friday, Conom argued that the crime of murder by extreme indifference is unconstitutionally vague in connection with a person acting in self-defense, and "fails on its face."

Charles Blackman, a deputy prosecutor, said Cramm is raising issues at appeal that were not contested during his trial. He said the wording of the charging papers and the instructions to the jury were appropriate.

Murder by extreme indifference is not a frequent charge, but it's not a new concept, Blackman said. The theory goes back to state laws enacted in 1909, he added.

He also argued that trial lawyer Royce Ferguson asked for and got a jury instruction that manslaughter was a lesser included crime, and an instruction on self-defense and excusable homicide.

"The defendant is taking something really simple and trying to make it complicated," Blackman told the appeals panel, which includes judges William Baker, Kenneth Gorse and Anne Wellington.

Cramm was aware of the risk when he picked up the rifle and fired it, Blackman added, and that's "the reason why nobody raised this objection at trial."

Blackman asked that the conviction be upheld.

In a related matter, another attempt will be made to hold the Cramms' homeowner's insurance policy liable for monetary damages to the victims' parents.

In November, a judge let Farmers Insurance Co. of Washington off the hook because of a clause excluding "intentional acts" that cause harm to others. The company claimed Cramm intentionally fired the rifle.

Lawyer Franklin Shoichet said he is seeking a direct state Supreme Court review of a Superior Court decision, and a national group advocating crime victims will file arguments in support of a quick review by the state's high court.