A Fairbanks man may go to trial for a fourth time on the same murder charge after a hung jury ended in another mistrial last week.
That result concluded the third time in about 10 years that attorneys have presented 48-year-old defendant Chad Zurlo’s case to a jury.
At issue is whether Zurlo committed second-degree murder when he shot and killed his quasi-landlord, Steven Corcoran, or if he legally used deadly force.
The case began with an incident in May of 2014. At that time, Zurlo and his then-girlfriend, Serena Vallier, were subletting a doorless room in the downstairs of a house that Corcoran was renting.
According to the defense, Corcoran entered the room and approached their bed one night, belligerent and drunk, yelling at Zurlo about work and eventually voicing a death threat.
Zurlo claims Corcoran then reached behind his own back, at which point Zurlo picked up a gun from a nightstand and shot Corcoran, killing him. Investigators did not find a gun on Corcoran but did recover guns he owned from the home.
In closing arguments Friday, Public Defender Eric Hedland said the case’s context means it’s not only a matter of self defense but also defense of premises.
State law says a person can use “deadly force upon another when and to the extent the person reasonably believes it is necessary to terminate what the person reasonably believes to be a burglary in any degree occurring in an occupied dwelling or building.”
And Alaska statute defines second-degree burglary as a “person enter[ing] or remain[ing] unlawfully in a building with intent to commit a crime in the building.”
“Was this something that Mr. Zurlo fantasized about doing? No,” Hedland said. “But for the actions of Mr. Corcoran, but for his threats, and drunken behavior, and cornering, and unlawful entry and unwillingness to leave … would this have happened? It certainly would not.”
Vallier – the only eye-witness to the shooting besides the defendant – died between the first and second trials.
But during last week’s trial, Deputy District Attorney Andrew Baldock referred to Vallier’s statements to investigators in 2014, when she said Zurlo told her directly after the shooting that he had “snapped.”
Baldock also said Vallier’s testimony from the first trial contradicts the defense’s claim that Corcoran made a death threat.
“She indicated that there was no threat made by Steve Corcoran to shoot Chad Zurlo. Instead, she indicated that right before the shooting – again, she tells you [Corcoran’s] last words: ‘Am I making you mad, Chad? Am I making you mad?’” he said. “And it was at that point that she indicated the defendant reached over, pulled out that holster, and she saw him point and fire.”
Baldock also argued that, though Corcoran was yelling at Zurlo, there was no evidence that he’d entered or remained in the room with the intent to commit a crime, nor that Zurlo needed to use deadly force to “terminate” Corcoran’s behavior.
The jury deliberated for about four hours Friday afternoon before determining they couldn’t come to a unanimous decision.
At the original trial, in 2017, a jury acquitted Zurlo of first-degree murder but found him guilty of second-degree murder.
An appeals court reversed that conviction in 2022 due to the prosecutor failing to present exculpatory evidence to the grand jury before the indictment was filed.
Last year, Zurlo went to trial again – but only for the second-degree murder charge. That’s the first time a jury hung.
Online court records indicate a new hearing is now scheduled for May 20, when lawyers will discuss scheduling another trial.
“I have not seen that,” Hedland told KUAC Tuesday, when asked about how often cases are tried four times.
The Fairbanks District Attorney’s office did not respond to a request for comment about the case’s future.
Online court records also show a so-called Lafler offer was filed after the trial concluded.
The document is confidential, but Lafler agreements are a type of plea deal that stem from a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court decision, which enshrined constitutional rights to effective counsel throughout a case, including the plea bargaining process.
Soon after the Supreme Court decision, the National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys published an article arguing that the decision was “likely to prompt prosecutors to routinely convey plea offers in writing or place those offers on the record.”
Putting a plea deal on the record does not mean that a defendant has accepted it or will accept it.