Men sentenced to 22 years in death, robbery
With two defendants pointing the guilty finger at each other, both pleaded guilty to the 2008 slaying and armed robbery of 19-year-old Marquez Tyler.
In a tense, emotional hearing Monday held in a courtroom packed with friends and family of the victim and the defendants, Tyrone Gleaton and Matthew Lamar Jackson pleaded guilty via an Alford plea to voluntary manslaughter and armed robbery.
The pair received matching negotiated sentences of 15 years, suspended to seven years in prison, for the manslaughter charge and 15 years for the armed robbery with sentences to be served consecutively.
The pair will serve at least 85 percent of the 22-year total sentence on the plea made under the U.S. Supreme Court case of North Carolina v. Alford, which allows the defendants to take advantage of pleading guilty but not explicitly admitting the crime.
Tyler was last seen Nov. 18, 2008, and was with the defendants, according to testimony. His mother suspected foul play, Assistant Solicitor David Miller said, and informed authorities.
His body was not found until Feb. 10, 2009. Coroner Tim Carlton said it was in an advanced state of decomposition and that Tyler died from a single shot to the back of the head.
Both men gave similar statements to Aiken County Sheriff's Office about the events, except each placed the murder weapon, a .22-caliber rifle, in the other's hand.
In court, Jackson spoke at length about the crime and apologized for his part in it; however, he appealed for his accomplice to admit that it was he who possessed and used the rifle on their one-time friend.
"I'm sorry for what I did; it was a stupid act. I apologize for being involved, but I didn't pull the trigger," Jackson told the court. "He pulled that trigger; that's the God's honest truth. I don't understand how he won't admit it. I was involved in the robbery. I can't take it back and the lies I told the family, but I just want to tell the truth."
The sentences did not sit well with the victim's family. While they are part of the process in negotiating plea deals, the family apparently signed off on the deal but then asked the judge to give maximum sentences.
When the sentence was announced by Judge Ferrell Cothran, there were many audible sighs and muttering from those supporting the victim's family. Miller acknowledged that the family was having second thoughts about the sentence when he addressed Cothran.
"How come you get more time for robbing somebody than you do for killing somebody?" asked one family member, not wishing to be identified.
The hearing was book-ended by trouble between supporters of both sides. Before entering the courtroom, allegations of threats and loudly expressed crosswords were shared. Afterward, authorities had to break up a scuffle between the two groups in the parking lot, even though Cothran had separated the groups by having one leave before the other.
Contact Mike Gellatly at mgellatly@aikenstandard.com.
- Local events for Friday, Feb. 10
- USCA women get revenge at home
- State approves $13.5M for road work in city
- Pacer hoops squads look to erase bad memories
- LETTER: Create jobs instead of slamming unions
- Could the USC-Clemson rivalry game ever go away?
- OPINION: Statehouse tackles 'honest-to-goodness red-blooded battle'
- South Carolina baseball program reaching new heights
- SC AG sues over rejected voter ID law
- New equipment allows larger planes to land at Aiken airport






Notice about comments:
AikenStandard.com is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. AikenStandard.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not AikenStandard.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.
Full terms and conditions can be read here.