AUBURN – Ronald Drake’s 39-year prison sentence for killing a man in 1997 with a chunk of ice will continue, at least until lawyers submit more papers.

On Friday, Drake’s pitch for a new trial was put on hold so lawyers on both sides could further explain their arguments in writing to Justice Thomas E. Delahanty II.

Delahanty, who presided over Drake’s original trial, will then decide whether to proceed with a formal hearing, he said.

He could also dismiss the whole petition.

In February 1997, Drake and a friend, Walter Hartford, beat and robbed 38-year-old Brad Burnell. They took his money and prescription drugs and left his battered body in a snowbank on Howe Street, police said.

Drake delivered the fatal blow, police said. He was sentenced to 39 years for the murder and 15 years for robbery. He is serving the sentences concurrently.

However, Drake’s lawyer, Jeffrey Parsons, is arguing that the fatal blow came from someone else.

On Friday, Parsons said that blood found on one of Drake’s boots – and tested for DNA prior to his trial – did not belong to Burnell. It came from a fight later that night, Parsons said.

Parsons is asking for retesting of the blood, and a new trial, based on a 2001 law that allows for retesting in certain cases.

The state argued Friday in Androscoggin County Superior Court that the petition ought to be dismissed.

“This is not the type of case the DNA statute was designed for,” argued Assistant Attorney General Lisa Marchese. “This is not a case of mistaken identity. It’s a case of what happened.”

“Ron Drake admitted to being there,” she said. “He said at the time of the trial, ‘I’m not the one who committed the fatal blow.’ “

Marchese discounted Parsons’ entire petition, saying parts were confusing.

“It feels like speculation,” she said.

If the state chooses to allow retesting of the 1997 evidence, it will be limited. The original clothes Drake and others were wearing were thrown away.

However, Marchese informed Parsons on Friday that the Maine State Clime Lab still has samples of the evidence on file.