Addendum: appeal denied
Martell's Appeal denied despite circumventing his constitutional right
In November 2014, the state then denied Martell's appeal. At first glance, the explanation appears to be "check-mate evidence" for the state's case against him:
But then the state returned to its original, curious assertion:
"the state still had sufficient, unused evidence to support a finding of probable cause..."
After this point, there is no other mention of any specific new or unused evidence other than the previous paragraph's "check-mate evidence".
Nothing had changed. There was no new or unused evidence presented (even at trial) yet the State Assistant Attorney General denied the appeal without ever specifying what that evidence was. In fact, the charge was dropped during the preliminary hearing due to lack of probable cause.
The Bottom Line
Even if testimony at trial was used to convict Martell of the charge, he is still guaranteed his constitutional right that probable cause be found at a preliminary hearing. This did not take place.
The state refused to take up Martell's appeal for justice without even doing any fact-finding to ascertain whether or not such evidence even existed.