Prosecutors said surveillance showed the killer buy a paring knife inside the store before using it outside minutes later.
PHOENIX — A Phoenix man was sentenced to 25 years in prison after a jury convicted him of second-degree murder in the stabbing death of a stranger outside a Safeway grocery store, prosecutors said.
The case against Damian Mitchell, 48, centered on a compressed and unusually direct timeline. Prosecutors said Mitchell bought a paring knife inside a Safeway near 5th Avenue and Osborn Road on Dec. 29, 2024, then used that knife moments later to stab 29-year-old Reminisce Biddle after the two men exchanged words outside. By the time sentencing was announced on Feb. 11, 2026, the state had already secured a jury verdict and presented the killing as a spontaneous but intentional act of lethal violence against someone Mitchell did not know.
Authorities said Mitchell and Biddle crossed paths outside the store and spoke briefly as they passed each other. Public reports have not described the exact words exchanged, but prosecutors said the contact was short and there was no known prior relationship between the men. According to the county attorney’s account, Mitchell turned around, followed Biddle behind a nearby building and stabbed him once in the chest. Biddle managed to return into the store seeking help before collapsing. He was taken to a hospital, where he later died from the wound. The simplicity of the sequence became one of the strongest parts of the state’s case: a brief encounter, a single pursuit and one fatal stab wound delivered with a knife purchased only minutes earlier.
Surveillance evidence appears to have done much of the factual work. Prosecutors said video showed Mitchell buying the paring knife inside the Safeway shortly before the attack. Officials also said the weapon matched the wound that killed Biddle. That gave jurors a tight evidentiary chain from purchase to use, leaving little room for confusion about what object caused the death or how quickly the attack followed the store visit. Police had arrested Mitchell in early January 2025 on suspicion of second-degree murder, and by sentencing the case had advanced from an open homicide investigation to a completed trial-level prosecution. Public reports available after the sentence did not describe a detailed defense explanation for the stabbing or suggest that Biddle had threatened Mitchell with a weapon.
The setting helped make the case stand out. This was not a killing inside a private home or an attack hidden from view. It happened outside a neighborhood grocery store, in a place associated with everyday errands and routine foot traffic. Prosecutors emphasized that ordinariness in their summary because it sharpened the randomness of the violence. Their theory was not that Mitchell arrived at the store already armed and looking for a target. It was that he bought a knife during a normal shopping trip and then used it almost immediately after a passing exchange. That compressed sequence gave the case a disturbing clarity and made the surveillance video especially important as a way to show jurors how fast the encounter escalated into a homicide.
The legal result is now fixed unless Mitchell seeks later review. The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office said a jury convicted him of second-degree murder, a class one dangerous felony, and he was sentenced to 25 years in prison. That sentence reflects both the seriousness of the offense and the state’s view that the killing was not an accident or a lesser assault gone wrong. No public report tied the case to a plea agreement, and the available coverage focused on the verdict and final sentence rather than post-trial disputes. The next developments, if any, would likely come through Arizona’s appellate process. Until then, the prosecution stands as the court’s answer to a killing that prosecutors said began with a few words outside a grocery store and ended with a stranger bleeding to death from a knife wound.
Mitchell is serving a 25-year prison sentence in Arizona. The next milestone would come only if he files an appeal challenging the conviction or the length of the sentence.
Author note: Last updated March 15, 2026.