ADVERTISEMENT

ARIZONA NEWS

Prosecutors to retry sentencing in Ian Mitcham case after mistrial declared

Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell confirmed during a news conference Thursday that prosecutors will be retrying the sentencing phase of the Ian Mitcham case after a mistrial was declared last month.

Watch: Will Middle East chaos send inflation skyrocketing again? | 9 mins

Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell confirmed during a news conference Thursday that prosecutors will be retrying the sentencing phase of the Ian Mitcham case after a mistrial was declared last month.

“Now obviously it’s not a retrial of the guilt phase or the aggravation phase, but we are going to be retrying the sentencing phase of that case,” Mitchell told reporters.

The judge declared a mistrial on May 27 after jurors reported they were at an impasse. However, it did not affect Mitcham’s conviction in the 2015 murder of Allison Feldman, a 31-year-old Scottsdale woman who was beaten, sexually assaulted and killed insider her home.

ADVERTISEMENT

Mitchell’s decision means that a new jury will be brought together, and if they cannot reach a unanimous decision then the judge will decide between a sentence of life or natural life in prison.

Background on the Ian Mitcham case so far

A jury found Mitcham guilty in April of first-degree murder, sexual assault and burglary after a trial that hinged on DNA evidence. It was also the first time familial DNA testing has been used to identify a murder suspect in Arizona.

On Feb. 18, 2015, Feldman was found by her boyfriend dead and covered in a sheet at her home near Loop 101 and Pima Road. Court documents said she died of asphyxiation with blunt force trauma.

Detectives found no sign of forced entry and were unable to find a connection between Mitcham and Feldman. Mitcham denied knowing Feldman or having been in her home.

In 2017, police initiated a familial DNA investigation using evidence found at the scene, which identified the suspected killer as someone closely related to Mitcham’s incarcerated brother.

Without acquiring a warrant, investigators then created a DNA profile using a blood sample taken from Mitcham after a January 2015 DUI arrest. In April 2018, they matched that profile to DNA found at the scene.

Mitcham was arrested and indicted a week later by a grand jury for first-degree murder, sexual assault and second-degree murder. He was held on a $5 million bond.

In 2022, Mitcham pleaded guilty to two felony counts in the DUI case. His defense team also moved to suppress the warrantless DNA evidence, as well as swab evidence collected at his 2018 arrest.

The trial court agreed that Mitcham’s Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure were violated and ruled the DNA evidence inadmissible.

However, in December 2024, the Arizona Supreme Court reversed the decision. It concurred that Mitcham’s Fourth Amendment rights were violated but also unanimously determined the “inevitable discovery” exception applied, meaning his DNA profile would have been created after his 2022 felony convictions.

ADVERTISEMENT

Prosecutors had supported their case primarily with forensic evidence, arguing that Mitcham’s DNA was found in multiple locations inside Feldman’s home, placing him at the scene the night she was killed.

The Associated Press and KTAR News 92.3 FM’s David Iversen contributed to this report. 

Kylie Werner KTAR.com editor

Kylie Werner is a web content editor for KTAR.com. Werner is from Bonita, California, or just 15 minutes south of San Diego. Since graduating from the Cronkite school in December 2023, she has spent her time covering local and hyperlocal news for… Read more

Comments

5 Comments

J
JAFO AZ 2 months ago

Omg.... I would love for one day that you put the bong down and post something intelligent.
PAY ATTENTION:
This person was found guilty. He committed the crime. His conviction wasn't found by him giving a confession under duress, like your friend Tommy Walker. The case is over.
They are now wasting resources deciding on his two identical sentences. The article clearly states that.

But I forget who I am talking to. We have all read your posts over the years and I don't expect you to understand the point I am making.

W
Wearenotperfect 2 months ago

"rightfully found guilty"

So was Tommy! Guilty or not, seems evident that you're the one who has fallen quite a few steps behind in understanding open comprehension.

J
JAFO AZ 2 months ago

Try to follow along....
"Justice" has already been served. He was rightfully found guilty.
We are now wasting time and money deciding between two essentially identical sentences, as this animal is never getting paroled, even though he may be technically eligible, especially at his age.

If reading comprehension isn't your thing, please don't post or reply.