Md. court upholds murder conviction despite missing body

The Court of Special Appeals has upheld the 2015 murder conviction of a Dorchester County man, finding prosecutors presented sufficient evidence for the jury to find a homicide had occurred even though the victim’s body was never found.

William Stevens Hamilton, of Hurlock, was convicted of first-degree murder last February for the death of Craig Parker, an African American man who occasionally worked on Hamilton’s farm before his disappearance in August 2009.

Hamilton was charged with the death in 2014 after telling multiple people he killed Parker because he believed he was stealing and buried him on the farm, according to the Court of Special Appeals opinion. He was also charged under Maryland’s hate crime statute, but the trial court granted a motion for judgment of acquittal.

On appeal, Hamilton claimed there was insufficient evidence to convict him because the state “wove a web of circumstantial evidence” and produced no physical evidence that Parker was dead.

Judge Douglas R.M. Nazarian, writing last week for a unanimous three-judge panel, disagreed.

“A body is not a prerequisite for a homicide conviction, and we don’t reward success in disposing of a victim’s body,” Nazarian wrote in an unreported opinion.

Prosecutors must produce independent direct or circumstantial evidence supporting its homicide theory sufficient for a rational fact-finder to determine a homicide occurred, he added.

Though the most compelling piece of evidence was Hamilton’s confession to his niece, who recorded a conversation about the killing at the request of police, it was not the only evidence.

Nazarian cited statements other witnesses testified Hamilton made that appeared to indicate he killed Parker, including “I don’t think they’ll ever find that man” and “that problem [will] not bother anybody else again.”

Despite Hamilton’s argument that prosecutors failed to show that Parker was dead and hadn’t “simply gone off the grid” – Parker did not have a cellphone or other technological connections – the appellate panel found sufficient evidence for a jury to determine Parker was deceased, including the fact that family had not heard from him since August 2009.

“Both sides offered an account of what happened to Mr. Parker, and the jury was within its rights to believe either,” Nazarian wrote.

Hamilton also claimed the trial court erred in not granting a mistrial after it was learned his niece testified while looking at documents she had obtained from law enforcement.

Hamilton’s niece and the law enforcement officer who had given her the police report provided conflicting accounts about when the document was requested and when she received it, but the trial court found Hamilton’s attorney could impeach the witness with this information and “the remedy is not mistrial.”

Hamilton also objected to a witness testifying that he used a racial slur while discussing Parker, but the appellate court found it was within the trial court’s discretion to admit the statement as part of the hate crime charge.

Talbot County solo practitioner Stephanie A. Shipley, who represented Hamilton at trial and on appeal, did not respond to a request for comment.

The case is William Stevens Hamilton v. State of Maryland, No. 0543 Sept. 2015.