Florida Death Row Inmate Sues To Get Truck of His Victims

B_1_deparvine_177253_0114B_1_vandusens_174509_0114For two years, the courts in Florida have been dealing with a bizarre filing by death row inmate William Deparvine, who was convicted in the killing in 2006 of Richard and Karla Van Dusen. He is suing to get a vintage Chevy pickup truck owned by the dead couple.

Richard Van Dusen, 57, refurbished the red 1971 Chevrolet Cheyenne truck won various car show awards before putting it up for sale. Deparvine responded to the advertisement and, on Nov. 26, 2003,Van Dusen, 58, and his wife, 49, were found dead with bullets in their heads.

At trial, prosecutors alleged that Deparvine typed out the bill of sale to make it look like he bought the truck for $6500 and forged Richard Van Dusen’s name.

DNA evidence linked Deparvine to the crime.

For the full story, click here

Kudos to BigFella.

8 thoughts on “Florida Death Row Inmate Sues To Get Truck of His Victims”

  1. All of the issues raised above are for a jury. Don’t you want to stop this jerk before that?

    There is no question the defense will prevail at trial. We do not want a trial. The defense argument is simple: HE’S A MURDERER! But, the plaintiff/killer wants to play with the family or make his case again. A combination of both I’d suspect.

  2. Of course he has to prove his case. The issue is, how far does he get? Can he survive summary judgment? Will the judge toss it under the Florida equivalent 12(b)(6) “no good faith basis.” The issue regarding the bill of sale is not decided upon by virtue of the criminal case as a matter of law. Only that he committed the offense of murder.

    Now. What do you do if you are the trial judge? Dismiss it as frivolous ab initio? Say nothing. Pass it to the appellate court and leave it to them? Will that delay his execution?

    It’s bad enough the family has to have a lawyer to deal with what is apparently nonsnese as a matter of gut. As a matter of law, he will lose in the end. Whether he prevails is not the issue. He’s committing a moral crime against the family and the law allows for it.

    We all agree the family should not have to go through this. In a vacuum of a law school setting, an interesting hypo perhaps. This crap is happening. What do you do if you’re the judge?

    @Prof. Turley: How are ya? I don’t know if you respond to comments or not, but, I’m curious what you know and think of the procedural posture of the case.

    Also, would you ever consider using this as a hypo for a contracts or civ pro class? The intellectual argument is the trial judge shouldn’t just bounce it as “bad faith” to start. The law protects everything. The family already has to deal with it, and, that is enough right there to sicken anyone. The realist argument it a judge should dismiss and punt, hoping the appellate courts will do the same. That’s antithetical to all concepts of justice. One can’t do that. Even the attorney for the defense/victim’s family said this goon is the best jailhouse lawyer ever.

    Morbid jurisprudence.

  3. He has to prove the purchase was completed and legal.

    Does he have a bill of sale? or a receipt for payment.
    It would seem his evidence is tainted.

    It might be considered the proceeds of a crime, and forfeitable.

  4. This is one of the more “bizarre” legal stories I’ve seen in a bit. Another word could be used to describe it other than bizarre. It rhymes with “bizarre.” Yes, this case is FUBAR.

    I feel compelled to argue for the soon to be really dead guy. Here. On the internet. But, that’s also b/c I’m having a flashback of some object being thrown at me by a prof for failing to argue in the alternative.

    Whether money exists or not is evidence as to lack of consideration (which I kind of feel like while writing this with respect to the victim’s family), though, not dispositive. He will merely testify he gave the money and the cops couldn’t find it. Something like that. It’s an issue of fact — for the jury. Where he can essentially, hurt the family again.

    Earlier I mentioned a DQ if judge rules there is no good faith basis. He’ll try that, and, if he loses, I think that issue is a winner on appeal for him. So, the judge can’t just dismiss on that. Again no res judicata Latin mumbo jumbo. All of the other elements seem to make a prima facie case for replevin or whatever COA he’s using.

    Plaintiff attorney has a great argument. HE KILLED THEM. I rest my case.

    Look, we don’t want this to go to a jury trial right? Right. So, legally, the conundrum is, how to dismiss before that? Hopefully, the fuzz have some mole in the hole with him. If they can get this guy to say he is screwing with the family, then we can dump it. However, he would argue (falsely) while in custody perhaps that is some new evidence to overturn his previous conviction. I can hear this jerk now. “Now’s my chance to prove my case.” In his mind, this is his opportunity to litigate the case. The judge cannot continue the case until he’s dead obviously. Every time he’s in court, he’s going to argue every point.

    This is wrong, but, I hope a snitch makes something up about him causing him to lose on a “good faith” issue. If the snitch makes it up, the judge has a perfect out as to credibility. She or he can rule it’s a bogus suit. Can’t really disturb that on appeal. Goobye.

    There are so many legal issues that are just too… legal. I like this straightforward piece.

  5. Should I fire up the DeLorean and go back in time for this warped law school hypo?

    He can will the truck should he prevail. No issue preclusion. If judge says no good faith basis, motion to DQ. And, they have Monster Truck derbies on death row twice a year. AHH. DAMMIT SIR! WHY DID YOU POST THIS GREAT ARTICLE!

  6. What I can’t figure out, is where Deparvine thinks he is going to be driving the truck if he gets his hands on it, certainly not on Death Row, in the afterlife?

  7. Ok, s we have a bill of sale. Where is the cash or money order? We have a contract only when consideration has been paid. After reading the article, where is the money?

Comments are closed.