Zoloft Defense Trial
South Carolina vs Pittman

Associated Press
Judge refuses to reduce sentence in Zoloft defense case

April 13, 2005

By BRUCE SMITH
Associated Press Writer

CHARLESTON, S.C. (AP) - A state judge has ruled there is no constitutional violation and refused to reduce the 30-year sentence for 15-year-old Christopher Pittman, who mounted a Zoloft defense before his murder conviction in the shotgun slayings of his grandparents.

"This court is not convinced that standards of decency have evolved to such an extent that would no longer permit juveniles to be sentenced to lengthy terms of imprisonment," said the 11-page ruling by Circuit Court Judge Danny Pieper filed late Monday.

Pittman was convicted Feb. 15 of the murder of Joe Pittman, 66, and Joy Pittman, 62, in November 2001. Pittman was 12 at the time.

The jury rejected his claim he was involuntarily intoxicated by the antidepressant Zoloft and didn't know right from wrong.

The defense asked Pieper to reduce his sentence to time served and probation until Pittman is 21. Attorneys cited the U.S. Supreme Court's recent ban on the death penalty for minors in arguing 30 years is "unconstitutionally excessive."

Pieper disagreed, writing the sentence does not violate the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

"The defense essentially asks this court to act as a 'super legislature' to rewrite the juvenile laws of this state under the guise of a constitutional mandate," he wrote.

The judge added "any change in policy desired by the will of the people must be resolved legislatively, not by judicial decree, consistent with the delicate balance of power placed upon the branches of our government."

Pieper noted the South Carolina Supreme Court has ruled "lengthy sentences or sentences of life without parole imposed on juveniles do not violate contemporary standards of decency so as to constitute cruel and unusual punishment."

"I'm disappointed in the ruling but I'm very appreciative of the careful consideration the judge gave to it," Pittman's attorney Andy Vickery said Wednesday. "He wrote an 11-page opinion on an issue that is of great importance to us."

He said the decision could be appealed through the state and federal courts but that is premature while Pieper is still considering a defense motion for a new trial.

A spokeswoman for prosecutor Barney Giese said his office would not comment on the ruling because the judge is still considering a second issue in the case.

The defense is seeking a new trial because a juror discussed the case outside the jury room before the verdict.

Two weeks after the verdict, jurors were brought back to court and questioned about the matter. Pieper said at the time there was no indication anything from the outside conversation made it into the deliberations.

The defense contends had Pieper known before the verdict, the juror would have been dismissed. The alternate who would have replaced him felt strongly Pittman was not guilty, the defense said.