A pretrial hearing Tuesday is expected to determine whether the capital murder trial of Anthony B. Mertz will move to another county.

The trial is scheduled to be held in Coles County, beginning with jury selection April 15. The defendant, Mertz, a former Eastern student, is accused of the June 12 murder of Shannon McNamara, an Eastern student.

Mertz’s defense, lead by Effingham attorney Paula Phillips, filed for a change of venue last month. The defense motion states Mertz’s ability to receive a fair trial has been impeded by the amount of media exposure the case has received.

State’s Attorney Steve Ferguson maintains that an impartial jury can be selected in Coles County.

The hearing will take place at 1 p.m. Tuesday at the Coles County Courthouse. Mertz, 25, has also been charged with home invasion and criminal sexual assault, both felonies.

After the defense filed the motion for venue change, Ferguson, the case’s lead prosecutor, said he still cannot see any reason for the trial to be moved.

The defense motion includes a list of dates in which information about the case was published in local newspapers and cites the results of an automated telephone survey.

Communication Express of Carbondale was hired by the defense to query county residents on their knowledge of the case. The survey, conducted, Dec. 12 reached 5,243 residents, but not every resident participated in the survey. In addition, not every participant in the survey answered every question.

Bob Warden, executive director for the Center on Wrongful Convictions at the Northwestern University School of Law, said a request for a change of venue is not uncommon in high-profile cases, especially if the crime occurred in a small county.

“A request for a change of venue is by no means unusual in a high-profile case,” he said in an interview after the defense’s motion was filed last month.

Warden said a change of venue request is less likely to be awarded in a more populous county, such as Cook County, which encompasses Chicago.

But no matter where the trial is scheduled to take place, it is the defense’s responsibility to prove there is a substantial danger that the atmosphere would impede a fair trial before a judge will move the trial, Warden said.

“It is essentially with in the discretion of the trial court to decide the change of venue is warranted,” he said. “This is not where there is specific standards by which it can be judged.”

The defense motion states that media exposure of the case “has included much information that is highly prejudicial to Mr. Mertz’s chances of receiving a fair trial.”

The prosecution last month filed a motion requesting more information about the defense survey. The prosecution’s motion states that the survey is the basis of the defense request to change venue.

Results of the survey included in the defense motion show 63 percent of the 2,199 Coles County residents who began the survey indicated they had some knowledge of the case.

When asked about Mertz’s guilt or innocence, 70 percent of the 1,273 respondents said he is probably guilty. Just one percent said Mertz is probably innocent and the remaining 29 percent gave no opinion.

According to 2000 Census statistics, the 1,273 who answered the question regarding Mertz’s guilt or innocence represent approximately 2.4 percent of the 53,196 residents who reside in Coles County.

“Assuming that the sample was selected in a random fashion, that’s a rather large sample, as a matter of fact,” Warden said.

He noted that in election polls a sample size of 500 or more can be considered effective. The key to an accurate survey, Warden said, is ensuring that the sample was done in a random fashion.

The survey also allowed respondents to leave a recorded message. The prosecution’s motion requested a copy of any tape recording and transcript of any recorded statements made. The motion also requests a list of all questions used in the survey .