PWC Consulting


                  

Ronnie Lee Kimble 

                                                  

 Home   v  Search

 Timeline  v  Case File  v  Trial Record  v  Media Coverage

 

 

 

 

Letter: John B. Hatfield to Ronnie Kimble


 

HATFIELD & HATFIELD
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
219 W. WASHINGTON STREET
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA 27401

KATHRYN K. HATFIELD

JOHN B. HATFIELD, JR.

CYNTHIA A. HATFIELD

 

June 22, 1999


Mr. Ronnie Kimble #0628799
Odom Correctional Institute
Route 1, Box 36 Jackson, NC 27845
 

Dear Ronnie;
 

I am in receipt of your letter of June 16, 1999.
 

David spoke to me this morning about your correspondence with us and your desire to be informed of the progress of your appeal.
 

David and I view the situation this way:
 

I was lead counsel during the trial phase because the Stumps hired me before the court appointed David and I had already appeared in your bond motion in Superior Court. During the trial phase David and I divided the work equally and made all tactical decisions by consensus. We believe that you participated in all decisions involving witnesses. The only potentially significant witness we decided not to call was Dr. Wilmington. David and I both concluded Dr. Wilmington would not be helpful. This was based on a one hour meeting with Dr. Wilmington and attended by Mike Ingold in which we played an audio tape to Dr. Wilmington of a prior phone conversation he and I had.
 

Dr. Wilmington was unable to help us undermine Mitch Whidden. It turned out he knew much more about Mr. and Mrs. Whidden's contention about what you had said and how Mitch Whidden reacted. Dr. Wilmington would have possibly tended to reenforce Whidden's version of events.
 

You participated in the preparation and evaluation of every other material witness and, I can assure you, you were very helpful on several occasions.


 

Mr. Ronnie Kimble Page Two
June 22, 1999
 

When you gave notice of appeal the judge appointed David Lloyd and me to prepare the record and brief. By agreement, David is lead appeal counsel and I am assisting him. Because we do not want me to cover ground already covered by David, he is reviewing the transcript and preparing the assignments of error. If David needs my help, he will call upon me.
 

The discovery materials provided to us before trial and our personal notes are not directly involved in the preparation of the appeal. David has his file and I have mine, Until your appeal is decided, I must retain those records in the normal course of business. After your appeal has been decided, I will turn my file over to you in large part upon your formal request. I will retain personal notes as permitted by law.
 

I cannot incur the substantial expense of copying my whole file in your case so when the time comes, I will inventory the discovery, the motions and orders and things of that sort and send them to you.
In the last paragraph of your June 16, 1999 letter, you ask when you can expect to receive copies of the items you requested. I am not aware that you have reason to expect anything to be sent to you until your appeal has been filed.
 

David Lloyd will continue to work on the record on appeal and the assignments of error. I will assist on the brief if David asks me to. I will retain my file in your case until the appeal is decided.
 

At the present time I am not planning on sending you anything whatsoever. I also have no plans to have a telephone conference with you.
 

Very truly yours,

 

/signature/

John B. Hatfield, Jr.

 

JBHjr/ph
cc: David Lloyd


PDF

 

 

Published August 15, 2006.  Report broken links or other problems.

PWC Consulting.  Visit our website at www.preventwrongfulconvictions.org for information on our Mission and Services, and to sign up for our Newsletter.