For this reason, it has long been established that prospective jurors are not to know of prior convictions until the penalty phase. . A. Pretrial developments The admissibility of the Crandall murder evidence was contested from the outset. The fact of a shotgun wound could perhaps have been established by a police officer or otherwise without getting into whether it was fatal. The State maintained that it understood the pretrial ruling on Rule 404(b) to allow evidence of the conviction itself, and that it relied on this interpretation in referring to the conviction in opening arguments. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident . According to Percy, on the day of the killings, he and Thompson went to Hillis Auto Sales where, without any forewarning, Thompson shot both victims and Thompson and Percy robbed them. Thompson and Percy each grabbed a large trash bag and drove back to Indianapolis. 49G03-9204-CF-60651, I join fully in the majority opinion, but write separately to make an observation pertinent to the second trial. See, e.g., Watson v. State, 540 N.E.2d 598 (Ind. Douglas Percy. Id. Citing Evidence Rules 402 (relevance) and 403 (balance of probative value and prejudice), Thompson argues that the State elicited far more evidence about Crandall's death than was necessary to prove this aspect of its case. In rebuttal, the State replied that the events surrounding the Crandall murder were relevant: The reason it's relevant is because it proves [Thompson's] identity. If Percy's account is credited, he was essentially an accomplice or, at a minimum, a direct observer of Thompson's criminal acts. On a prearranged signal, Percy gave the gun to Thompson, who knocked Crandall down and stated that he thought he had broken Crandall's neck. The fact that Crandall died and the fact that Thompson was convicted of his murder did not bear on any aspect of, Percy's credibility because Percy did not testify to either subject. Despite Thompson's actions linking the separate events, the jury was impermissibly left with the reverberating clang of the Crandall murder ringing in its ears, United States v. Merriweather, 78 F.3d 1070, 1077 (6th Cir.1996) (reversing conviction due to erroneous admission of propensity evidence) (internal quotation marks omitted), suggesting that because Thompson killed and robbed Crandall, he must have killed and robbed Hillis and Beeler too. Percy did not see the location of the shot, but assumed that Thompson had shot Crandall in the head. In March 1992, Percy approached Indianapolis police with what he claimed was information about Thompson's involvement in the killings. DICKSON, SULLIVAN and SELBY, JJ., concur. The only similarity here between the Crandall murder and the Indianapolis killings was the use of firearms to kill the victims (and different guns were used in each crime). . The defense responded that the conviction was: (1) impermissible bolstering of Percy; (2) irrelevant to proving what happened at Hillis Auto Sales on the day of the murders; and (3) too prejudicial to be outweighed by any probative value. Brewer noted that, as in habitual offender proceedings, the death penalty information must be pleaded on a separate page from the charging instrument to "shield [the defendant] from the hazard of having the knowledge of his prior criminal record prematurely imparted to the jury. The State emphasized the details of Crandall's killing from the beginning. Brewer also established that the jury is impermissibly tainted when the aggravating circumstance to be charged is either a prior murder conviction, a prior murder unrelated to the current offense, or a prior life sentence. Id. "See footnote 5 Brewer, 275 Ind. See, e.g., Heavrin v. State, 675 N.E.2d 1075, 1083 (Ind.1996). Brewer also established that the jury is impermissibly tainted "when the aggravating circumstance to be charged is either a prior murder conviction, a prior murder unrelated to the current offense, or a prior life sentence." . In the end, an impermissible flood of damaging propensity evidence washed away Thompson's right to a fair trial. Specifically, prospective jurors were informed, verbatim, of the four aggravating circumstances the State had pleaded against Thompson in the death penalty information. At oral argument in this Court, the State contended that these details, which were partially corroborated by other witnesses as explained below, were admissible to show Percy's credibility. The Seventh Circuit held that the fact that the possessor had been killed was admissible to prove his lack of consent to the transfer of possession and, therefore, that the car had been stolen from him. If Percy's testimony about Thompson's taking the murder weapon from Crandall was the permissible core evidence showing Thompson's access to the gun, the other details-an execution style shooting, Thompson's conviction for the Crandall murder-were a penumbra of dubious relevance and potentially inflammatory impact. Doug was born in San Jose, California on February 3, 1958. Two witnesses-the forensic pathologist and Percy's friend Mike Featheringill-testified to how Crandall died. We have little difficulty concluding that the fact and manner of Crandall's death, and Thompson's murder conviction, were highly prejudicial to Thompson. When shown the handgun allegedly used to kill Hillis and Beeler, Percy testified that it looks like the one [Thompson] always carried, and that it resembled one of the guns that was taken from Crandall's house. The proffered conviction here does not approach the probative value required to outweigh that prejudice under Rule 403. That conviction was affirmed on direct appeal. I don't think a signature, in quotes, is a required. 1974), the defendants were charged with concealing a stolen car and moving it in interstate commerce. The best result we found for your search is Jerry Wayne Thompson age 70s in Portland, OR in the Maplewood neighborhood. Champlain v. State, 681 N.E.2d 696, 702 (Ind. . On a prearranged signal, Percy gave the gun to Thompson, who knocked Crandall, down and stated that he thought he had broken Crandall's neck. 1983, trial court committed reversible error by informing jury sua sponte during voir dire of inmate's prior convictions for rape and sexual assault). On February 14, 1991, one month before the murders in this case, Wesley Crandall Jr. was shot to death in his home in New Castle, Indiana. Hardin v. State, 611 N.E.2d 123, 129 (Ind. Contact us. Jerry Thompson, his brothers David (Lisa) and Dan (Ana) Thompson, his nephews, Lucas . When the defendant objects on the ground that the admission of particular evidence would violate Rule 404(b), the following test should be applied: (1) the court must determine that the evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is relevant to a matter at issue other than the defendant's propensity to commit the charged act; and (2) the court must balance the probative value of the evidence against its prejudicial effect pursuant to Rule 403. The trial court began the voir dire, before any questioning had occurred, by reading both the charging information and the death penalty information to all prospective jurors. The bag Thompson carried contained several guns and Percy's bag contained marijuana and shell casings. Reading of Death Penalty Information in Voir Dire We first take up an issue not raised by the parties. denied; Pirnat v. State, 612 N.E.2d 153, 155 (Ind.Ct.App.1993) (in prosecution for child molesting, [t]estimony regarding the previous [child molesting] conviction and details of the previous molestation were obviously highly prejudicial) (citation and footnote omitted); United States v. Cox, 536 F.2d 65, 72 (5th Cir.1976) (admission of a rap sheet detailing the defendant's criminal record, including prior convictions, was reversible error). They found the 41-year-old inmate on the floor with stab wounds. Moreover, the State emphasized the prior misconduct in its opening statement, during the case in chief, and again in its closing argument. Accordingly, even where the defendant's involvement in a prior murder is relevant in part, the circumstances of the killing should not be presented unless they too are relevant. Indiana Evidence Rule 404(b) provides that "[e]vidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. at 367, 417 N.E.2d at 906. Access to the murder weapon, particularly where the evidence is circumstantial as in this case, is such a permissible purpose. In June 1991, defendant Jerry Thompson and Douglas Percy were driving through Illinois and were stopped for a traffic violation. . In light of this disposition, it is unnecessary to. Accordingly, over Thompson's objection, an officer with the New Castle Police Department was allowed to testify that he attended Thompson's trial in Henry County for Crandall's murder, thirty to forty witnesses were called (including Percy), and that the jury convicted Thompson. The State responded that his testimony was admissible under Evidence Rule 801(d)(1)(B) as a prior consistent statement to rebut Thompson's recent charge of improper motive. Illinois state police recovered a nine-millimeter handgun from the vehicle that ballistics tests later determined was the weapon used to kill Hillis and Beeler. We need not address whether this error is a ground for reversal in the absence of any objection by the defense because the convictions must be set aside for the reasons explained in Parts II and III. The State also claims that any prejudice to Thompson was offset by a limiting instruction to the jury to constrain its consideration of prior acts to the issue of identity. United States v. York, 933 F.2d 1343, 1353-54 (7th Cir. That's what identifies him with being associated with that gun. Our cases have long admonished that "one crime cannot be proved in order to establish another distinct crime even though they be of the same kind. Here, one of the aggravating circumstances charged in addition to the prior murder was that Thompson intentionally killed Hillis and Beeler while committing or attempting to commit a robbery. Mar 3, 2022 Mar 3, 2022; Facebook; Twitter; WhatsApp; SMS; . The prosecutor referred not only to Percy's allegations, but also to their validation in the form of Thompson's murder conviction. Their license was verified as active when we last checked. Percy gave the following account. The list of "other purposes" in the Rule is not exhaustive; extrinsic act evidence may be admitted for any purpose not specified in Rule 404(b) unless precluded by, the first sentence of Rule 404(b) or any other Rule. Genealogy record of %1. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident Citing Evidence Rules 402 (relevance) and 403 (balance of probative value and prejudice), Thompson argues that the State elicited far more evidence about Crandall's death than was necessary to prove this aspect of its case. Family and friends must say goodbye to their beloved Jerry Thompson of Sweetwater, Tennessee, born in Athens, Tennessee, who passed away at the age of 66, on December 2, 2020. The relevance and balancing issues are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. The defense argued that the court's pretrial ruling permitted evidence that the gun allegedly used to kill Hillis and Beeler had been taken from Crandall when he was killed, and nothing more. He didn't stomp on him; he didn't take a shotgun and nearly blow his head off. . In June 1991, defendant Jerry Thompson and Douglas Percy were driving through Illinois and were stopped for a traffic violation. See, e.g., Taylor v. State, 659 N.E.2d 535, 542-43 (Ind. United States v. Burke, 948 F.2d 23 (1st Cir.1991) (bootstrapping testimony related to extrinsic acts is admissible but only to the extent it is relevant to a material fact). 1983, trial court committed reversible error by informing jury sua sponte during voir dire of inmate's prior convictions for rape and sexual assault). at 368, 417 N.E.2d at 906. . Ultimately this case turns on whether the jury's exposure to the Crandall incident exceeded permissible bounds. Bill Percy Bill Percy Partner Thompson Dorfman Sweatman LLP 201 Portage Avenue Suite 2200 Winnipeg, MB R3B 3L3 PH: 204.934.2455 FX: 204.934.. collaborativepracticemanitoba.ca Lawyers - Our People | TDS Law Loveless v. State, 240 Ind. [1] He is a prolific author of books on a variety of related topics, specializing in the American Civil War, the history of the Southwestern United States, and Texas history. 2d 1028 (1964) (per curiam) (conviction reversed because five jurors had been present when the defendant's conviction of a similar charge was announced in open court before the trial); Scott v. Lawrence, 36 F.3d 871 (9th Cir. The exception's rationale is that the crimes, or means used to commit them, were so similar and unique that it is highly probable that the same person committed all of them. Percy was the only witness conclusively placing Thompson at the scene. He went to elementary school in Solvang and graduated from Santa Barbara High School in 1976. reach the remaining claims of error.See footnote 12 IV. 1994) (in action against prison officials under 42 U.S.C. Thompson also challenges the testimony of New Castle gun dealer Jeff Vaughn, who testified that in October 1990 he sold Crandall a gun resembling the second gun discussed above. The prosecutor referred not only to Percy's allegations, but also to their validation in the form of Thompson's murder conviction. The trial court denied Thompson's motion, ruling that the State could show how a weapon of the crime was obtained. Indeed, the State does not contend that these were signature crimes. . As Percy waited nearby in the living room, Thompson and Crandall spoke in the kitchen. Jerry Don Thompson serves as President of Voyager Energy Services and Vice President of Granbury Thompson Group offering SandX and Super Loop Products. There is no shortage of decisions reversing convictions due to the erroneous admission of the defendant's prior criminal history, specifically prior convictions. Evidence is sufficient if the probative evidence and reasonable inferences drawn from the evidence could have allowed a reasonable trier of fact to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. And, he took Wesley Crandall's money that was there, and the marihuana. 9. It was noted at oral argument in this Court that due to the erroneous (but unobjected) reading of the death penalty information in voir dire, the jury was advised from the outset of Thompson's conviction of Crandall's murder. Indeed, by the time of closing argument, the State referred to the discrete killings as a "circle" of criminal conduct for which Thompson should be held responsible. And, who does [the State] say was in Illinois in June of 1991, when [Thompson] was stopped by [Illinois police]? It cannot be expected to make its decision in a void United States v. Moore, 735 F.2d 289, 292 (8th Cir.1984). Instead what happened, was Jerry Thompson took his shotgun and he blew part of Wesley Crandall's head off, and killed him. 1696, 12 L.Ed.2d 1028 (1964) (per curiam) (conviction reversed because five jurors had been present when the defendant's conviction of a similar charge was announced in open court before the trial); Scott v. Lawrence, 36 F.3d 871 (9th Cir.1994) (in action against prison officials under 42 U.S.C. That is not the end of the analysis, however.
Centroid Of A Curve Calculator,
Blackwell Ghost 6 Release Date,
Spirit Lake Tsunami Video,
Monica Danger Leon Missing,
Articles D