April Wilkens immediately denied sentencing relief under Oklahoma Survivors’ Act

(TULSA, Okla.) Following a two-day hearing, domestic violence survivor April Wilkens was denied a shortened sentence despite her lawyer’s efforts to show that her crime was influenced by abuse. Wilkens is currently serving a life sentence for killing her rapist and abuser Terry Carlton.

Tulsa County District Judge David Guten's courtroom was filled with family, friends and longtime supporters of April Wilkens on Wednesday for the commencement of her resentencing hearing under the Oklahoma Survivors’ Act. 

The law, which took effect in 2024, allows judges to reduce a sentence if domestic violence was a contributing factor in the crime. Wilkens’ case inspired the new law and, nearly a year ago, she became the first person to apply for relief under it. To date, one woman has had her sentence reduced due to the Survivors’ Act, and several other cases have been denied. 

In 1999, Wilkens was found guilty of fatally shooting her ex-fiance, Terry Carlton, the previous year. Her lawyers at the time argued Wilkens had been attempting to escape another life-threatening beating at the hands of the Don Carlton car dealership heir. Wilkens has spent the past 27 years in prison after a jury rejected her battered woman syndrome defense during her trial.

Her application for a resentencing hearing under the Oklahoma Survivors’ Act stated Carlton had “strangled, raped, beaten, threatened, stalked, manipulated, and coercively controlled” her multiple times throughout their two-year relationship. It also stated that the judge, district attorneys and witnesses from her original trial did not dispute that Wilkens was a victim of domestic violence. 

Both the petitioner and state presented opening statements, called witnesses and made closing arguments during the hearing. 

The first day of testimony included judge Claire Eagan, who assisted Wilkens in filing her first emergency protection order against Carlton and recalled black eyes and bruises on Wilkens’ face, neck and arms. District attorney Steve Kunzweiler chose not to cross-examine Eagan.

Former director of YWCA OKC domestic abuse services Angela Beatty served as an expert witness for the petitioner. Beatty was questioned by Wilkens’ attorney Colleen McCarty on the cycles of abuse and domestic violence’s long-term effects on survivors. Beatty seemed to struggle during cross-examination, even retracting some of her testimony. 

Wilkens’ attorney also called former police officer Aaron Tallman to testify about his knowledge of domestic altercations and drug use by Wilkens and Carlton. He was also questioned extensively on the mental health and domestic violence training he had received as a police officer in the 1990s. He testified to having received 4 to 8 hours of such training at the Police Academy.

Beatty and Tallman both acknowledged a vast difference in how cases related to domestic violence and mental health are handled today. 

Wilkens herself opted out of testifying. 

"April's trial testimony speaks for itself,” McCarty explained to the court. “She has never wavered or changed her story from her original statements and testimony. The trial transcript stands.”

The second day of the hearing featured forensic experts, including clinical and forensic psychologist Jarrod Steffan, who spent almost an hour discussing his qualifications and achievements. 

Steffan, who was asked by the state to review the case for the resentencing hearing, concluded that it was drugs and mania, not domestic violence, that caused Wilkens to kill Carlton. Having only met and interviewed Wilkens once last month, he relied heavily on 27-year-old assessments and doctors’ evaluations to reach his conclusions. 

Steffan made conflicting statements about tests that were conducted to determine Wilkens’ mental state at the time of the murder, and said that all of Wilkens’ statements and accounts of the abuse and the night of the murder were "similar and consistent."

Wilkens’ team was allowed to bring in a rebuttal witness to counter Steffan’s claims.

Forensic psychiatrist Reagan Gill refuted many of Steffan's statements and questioned why he had not reached his own diagnosis of Wilkens, which she said is typical when psychologists or psychiatrists are asked to serve as expert witnesses. Gill testified that Steffan did not use the proper tools of their profession, and stated that jury verdicts should not be a factor in forming psychological opinions.

During closing arguments on Thursday afternoon, McCarty displayed large posters documenting the abuse timeline and reminded the court that none of the emergency protective orders Wilkens had taken out on Carlton were ever enforced. McCarty stated that Carlton always managed to escape arrest even though he had active warrants and was found lurking around Wilkens’ property with both a stun gun and a pistol. Most importantly, she said, Wilkens had been a happy mother with a thriving prosthetics business before she met Terry Carlton, not the broken shell of a person she was at the time of the murder.

The state's closing argument largely focused on a similar case in New York. Assistant district attorney Meghan Hilborn insisted Wilkens was experiencing a psychotic episode on the night of Carlton's murder due to drugs and mental illness and was not acting in self-defense. Hilborn read excerpts from Wilkens’ videotaped confession that she said demonstrated that Wilkens was manic that evening. 

After closing arguments, Judge Guten wasted no time in rendering his verdict. Although he agreed that Wilkens had met the burden of proof to establish that she was a victim of domestic violence, he did not believe her team had established that the domestic violence was the main contributing factor in her crime.

Judge Guten acknowledged that the case was complicated and stated that a jury dismissing battered woman syndrome does not preclude a qualification for resentencing under the Oklahoma Survivors’ Act. 

Guten also stated that Ms. Beatty was a terrible witness and gave no weight to her testimony because he considered it that of an advocate rather than an expert. 

The judge concluded his decision by reminding the court that the burden of proof in a resentencing hearing rests solely on the petitioner, and without testimony from Wilkens, the burden was not met.

McCarty said she plans to file an immediate appeal to Judge Guten's decision.