Tuesday, September 23, 2003
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

Prosecutor urges court to uphold Rudin conviction

Owens: Jury had ample evidence to find woman guilty of murder

Margaret Rudin Found guilty in 2001 of murdering her millionaire husband seven years earlier

CARSON CITY -- The trial of Margaret Rudin had the "air of a circus from time to time," but her 2001 conviction for killing her husband was fair and should be upheld on appeal, a prosecutor told the Supreme Court on Monday.

Clark County Chief Deputy District Attorney Christopher Owens said Rudin had a vigorous defense, and the jury had ample evidence on which to convict her of murdering her millionaire husband, Ron Rudin, in December 1994.

District Judge Joseph Bonaventure, who presided over the 10-week trial, properly evaluated a motion for a new trial and other issues that came up, and his judgment should be relied upon, Owens told the court.

Bonaventure had rejected the defense call for a new trial.

But Craig Creel, the deputy public defender representing Rudin on appeal, argued that it was the "singular worst" example of a criminal case he has seen.

Rudin's original attorney, Michael Amador, was grossly unprepared, he said. Even though Rudin's legal team was bolstered by veteran attorney Tom Pitaro, there was inadequate time to prepare a satisfactory defense, Creel said.

Questions that should have been raised in Amador's opening statement were never mentioned, he said. Instead, jurors were exposed to a 3 1/2-hour rambling statement that bore little relationship to the case, Creel said.

Amador began his statement by saying, "Today is a great day for me," Creel said.

Jurors convicted Margaret Rudin in May 2001 of first-degree murder with the use of a deadly weapon. She was given a life sentence with the chance for parole after 20 years.

Justice Bob Rose questioned Owens about whether Bonaventure ruled properly on the request for a new trial. The judge himself said, "I never heard that in an opening statement in my life," Rose said.

Rose and Justice Myron Leavitt also questioned whether Amador's representation of Rudin created a conflict, given his preoccupation with attention from the media.

Owens said Bonaventure went out of his way to ensure Rudin received a fair trial, allowing hearsay evidence favorable to the defense and breaks during the trial to allow preparation.

But Creel disagreed, saying the inadequate preparation and terrible opening statement amounted to ineffective assistance of counsel requiring a new trial.

"It would be a tragedy to uphold this miscarriage of justice," he said.

The court will rule later on the case.

Prosecutors contended at trial that Rudin shot her 64-year-old husband in the head as he slept in the bedroom of his Alpine Place home. They believe she had help in disposing of the body, though no one else has been charged. The victim's skull was found on a hillside at Nelson's Landing near the Colorado River in January 1995.

Rudin's trial initially was delayed because she fled the state shortly before she was indicted in April 1997. She was caught in November 1999 in Massachusetts.