Suspect in Tucson child killing loses bid to get new judge

Christopher M. Clements was charged in 2018 with the separate kidnappings and killings of Isabel in April 2012 and of 13-year-old Maribel Gonzalez in June 2014.

He was convicted in September in Maribel’s slaying and was sentenced to natural life in prison for first-degree murder plus another 17 years in prison for kidnapping, which will be served consecutively.

Clements, 41, stood trial in February in Isabel’s killing. Jurors, after hearing from 30 witnesses, spent two days deliberating before Pima County Superior Court Judge James Marner declared a mistrial, based on their inability to reach a unanimous decision.

Marner presided over both trials. On March 27, the day Clements was scheduled for a hearing to discuss a potential retrial in the Isabel Celis case, his lawyers filed a motion to remove Marner, saying his “interest or prejudice” would prevent a fair and impartial trial.

They cited as evidence an article published in the Arizona Daily Star on March 15, in which four of the jurors in the mistrial discussed the deliberation process.

The Star reported that after the mistrial was declared, Marner told jurors about Clements’ previous conviction in Maribel Gonzalez’s death and provided some details about the case.

The defense lawyers’ motion said the judge only told jurors negative information about Clements and withheld “critical facts” that led detectives to initially suspect Isabel’s father, Sergio Celis, who was never charged, of being involved in her disappearance. Marner’s statements demonstrated “bias and prejudice” against Clements, the defense said.The motion said that because Marner’s statements appeared in the article, “the public’s confidence and integrity in the judicial system is compromised,” and that there would be “no chance at all” that Clements would receive a fair trial.

The prosecution did not file a response to the motion and Deputy Pima County Attorney Tracy Miller declined to make a statement during Wednesday’s hearing.

Judge Renee Bennett said that for her to grant the motion, the defense would have had to provide a preponderance of evidence that Marner’s continued involvement in the case would create an unfair trial.

Bennett said that of the 50 paragraphs in the Star article about the jurors, only one paragraph mentioned Marner’s conversation with the jury. She said the information he provided jurors was an “undisputed factual piece of information” and not an opinion.

She also said that at the time of the conversation, the jurors had been excused from service and were members of the public who could have learned about Clements’ previous conviction on their own, as it was public record that had been widely disseminated.

“The evidence that has been presented does not establish that Judge Marner commended or criticized the jury verdict or commiserated with jurors,” Bennett said. “The defendant has not demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that Judge Marner had a personal interest in the case, is prejudiced against the defendant, or (that) his keeping the assignment would prevent a fair and impartial hearing.”

A retrial date has not been set.