On Tuesday, October 8, 2024, The Joplin Globe reported that Judge Dean Dankelson referred a motion to the Missouri Supreme Court seeking his recusal from a high-profile case involving Robert W. Shields, a convicted child sexual abuser. The decision comes after an appeals court recently vacated Shields’ life sentence.
Shields, 53, from Joplin, was convicted in February 2021 on multiple charges, including first-degree statutory rape and first-degree statutory sodomy, stemming from crimes committed against a girl who was as young as seven. Following his conviction, Shields was initially released on a $100,000 bond but fled by removing his electronic monitoring device on the day he was scheduled for sentencing in March 2021. He evaded capture for several months until he was apprehended in Colorado in 2022 and returned to Missouri.
During a sentencing hearing held on August 22, 2022, Judge Dankelson imposed a life sentence for the first-degree statutory rape charge, along with sentences of 99 years for statutory sodomy, and the maximum penalties of 15 years and seven years for the other two charges, all to be served consecutively. However, Shields appealed both his convictions and the sentences, claiming his constitutional right to counsel was violated during the sentencing process.
On September 10, 2024, the Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, upheld Shields’ convictions but vacated his sentences, stating that he had been denied representation during the critical hearing. The appeals court found that Judge Dankelson had not allowed Shields to secure new counsel despite the defendant’s claims of a conflict of interest arising from a federal lawsuit he filed against his previous attorneys.
At the sentencing hearing, Shields expressed dissatisfaction with his legal representation and sought to delay the proceedings to obtain new counsel. Judge Dankelson, however, ruled that the court would proceed with sentencing regardless of Shields’ request, stating, “I am going to let you do so, but we are going to proceed with sentencing today one way or the other.”
In his appeal, Shields contended that his attorneys failed to call three witnesses he wanted to testify at his trial and that he had difficulty communicating with them after being brought back to Missouri. He argued that this lack of effective representation adversely affected the outcome of his sentencing.
Shields’ new attorney, Andrew Hendrick, filed a motion for Judge Dankelson’s recusal, arguing that the judge’s actions and perceived bias during the sentencing hearing had influenced the decisions made. The motion referred to a transcript from the hearing where Judge Dankelson stated, “I am not going to let you sit in here and speak ill of Mr. Rhoades,” referring to Shields’ former attorney. Hendrick suggested that this statement indicated a personal bias against Shields.
The victim in this case, now 20 years old and residing out of state, testified during the trial that she did not disclose the abuse until she reached out for help after running away from home. She informed her mother a month later, which led to the police being notified.
The Missouri Supreme Court will now review the motion for reassignment of the case, which has garnered significant public attention due to the serious nature of the allegations and the subsequent legal proceedings. As the situation unfolds, the court’s decision will play a crucial role in determining the future of Shields’ sentencing and any further legal recourse available to him.
Source: Aol.com
