Joshua Fulbright alleges prosecutor vindictiveness in appeal

CLAY COUNTY (KFDX/KJTL) — A Clay County man convicted of a 2-year-old’s murder now accuses prosecutors of being vindictive, among other things, as reasons his conviction and life sentence should be reversed.

On March 5, 2025, Joshua Thomas Fulbright was found guilty of capital murder by a Montague County jury for causing the death of 2-year-old Scarlette Olivia Newsom in 2018 after around two hours of deliberation. He was automatically sentenced to life in prison without parole.

After Fulbright’s request for a new trial was denied by Trish Coleman Byars, 97th Judicial District Judge, Fulbright’s attorneys filed notice of his intent to appeal the trial court’s judgment and sentence.

On Friday, Oct. 3, 2025, Fulbright’s appellate attorney, Jeromie Oney, filed an appellate brief on Fulbright’s behalf, listing six issues with the trial court’s judgment and asking that the conviction be reversed and remanded for a new trial.

According to Fulbright’s appellate brief, the trial court excluded testimony from a witness who testified as an expert for the defense, Dr. David Sabine. The brief stated that Dr. Sabine was set to testify to Fulbright’s character.

The brief stated that Dr. Sabine was set to testify that, according to his assessment of Fulbright, he didn’t possess character qualities similar to those of individuals who would harm a child.

The appellate brief also said that Dr. Sabine was intending to testify that Sarah Newsom, the victim’s mother and Fulbright’s former girlfriend, possessed character qualities consistent with someone who would harm a child.

The brief alleged that the trial court erred by excluding Dr. Sabine’s testimony regarding Fulbright and Newsom’s character, also alleging in its second appellate issue that Fulbright was entitled to a bill of review for Dr. Sabine’s testimony, but the court denied him that right.

The third appellate issue raised in Fulbright’s appellate brief claimed that prosecutors with the 97th Judicial District Attorney’s office acted vindictively toward Fulbright by enhancing his charge from murder, as alleged when he was first indicted in 2018, to capital murder, the charge for which he was convicted in March 2025.

Fulbright’s conviction in March 2025 was the first in three attempts at a trial related to the death of the child. A first attempt to try Fulbright in 2019 ended with a mistrial when a jury could not be seated in Henrietta out of a pool of 80 residents. 

Fulbright’s second trial in 2022 ended with a mistrial when his defense attorney was picked up on a DWI with a child passenger charge. Court records show the charge against Barber was later dismissed.

The appellate brief alleged prosecutorial vindictiveness directed at Fulbright, since the 2022 attempt at his trial ended in a mistrial, and the charge was only enhanced to capital murder after the mistrial.

Fulbright’s appellate brief also alleged three other issues with the trial court’s judgment and sentence:

• Ineffective trial counsel
• Insufficient evidence for a jury to convict Fulbright of capital murder
• Facebook records were admitted without proper authentication

Katie Boggeman, 97th Judicial District Attorney, will now have the chance to respond on behalf of the prosecution to the allegations in Fulbright’s appellate brief.

Once both sides have filed a brief with the Second Court of Appeals, the case will be set for submission to the appellate justices, who will deliberate to determine whether the trial court’s judgment and sentence will be upheld, amended, or reversed altogether.