Because the risk that the jury would draw the forbidden inference based on what happened in Henry County is undeniable, the probative value of the extra details of the Crandall murder was substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. Douglas Percy. However, the details of the killing, including the cause of death "as being two gunshot wounds in the head," id. The trial court ruled that the State would be allowed to simply explain presence and then cut it off and let's get on., Percy gave the following account. They found the 41-year-old inmate on the floor with stab wounds. The fact of Thompson's conviction for murdering Crandall was wholly irrelevant to establishing his access to the murder weapon. They met Mr. Crandall in his home in New Castle; they conducted their business, and when it came time to leave, they didn't leave. While we have reversed on the basis of evidence improperly admitted during the State's case in chief, it might turn out that discrete pieces of this evidence would be admissible as rebuttal. Join Facebook to connect with Jerry Thompson and others you may know. Doug's military training took place in Hastings. 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. Lannan v. State, 600 N.E.2d 1334 (Ind.1992). The State again argued that Percy's decision to come forward led to Thompson's conviction for Crandall's murder and the release from jail of two men who had initially pleaded guilty to that crime. 1990) (citing Brewer). A forensic pathologist who testified as to the causes of death of Hillis and Beeler was coincidentally the same doctor who performed Wesley Crandall's autopsy. In this review, we do not reweigh evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses. SHEPARD, C.J., concurs with separate opinion. 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. 1995). Jerry K. Thompson was convicted of two counts of murder,See footnote 1 two counts of robbery,See footnote 2 and one count of carrying a handgun without a license.See footnote 3 The trial court sentenced Thompson to death for the murders and imposed a term of years for the other convictions. 1996) (internal quotation marks omitted). In its effort to prove guilt, the State may not flood the courtroom with unnecessary and prejudicial details of prior criminal conduct merely because some of that evidence is relevant and admissible. They have also lived in Phippsburg, ME and Beverly, MA. Percy testified that Thompson "shot" Crandall. [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. The State's contention that the extra details of the Crandall murder helped prove identity is unpersuasive. If Percy's account is credited, he was essentially an accomplice or, at a minimum, a direct observer of Thompson's criminal acts. As a result, the, decision to admit evidence of Thompson's access to the gun, and the State's offer of corroborative evidence to support Percy's version of the events in New Castle, was within the trial court's discretion. Because the effect of this testimony on the jury was at best speculative, and likely negligible in light of the more inflammatory evidence presented related to Crandall's murder, we see no basis for reversal on this point. The jury therefore knew from the outset that Thompson had been a killer and a thief in the past. Douglas is related to Greg S Percy and Theresa Marie Percy as well as 1 additional person. Pointing to Percy's own testimony that he was not always truthful, the defense urged that Percy was a "liar" who implicated Thompson to avoid prosecution for altering a vehicle identification number and possible culpability for his role in the three killings. 1983, trial court committed reversible error by informing jury sua sponte during voir dire of inmate's prior convictions for rape and sexual assault). Although corroboration of collateral facts is sometimes permissible to show credibility, see, e.g., Ind. Resides in Mead, WA. Pay particular attention to Mr. Percy. The identity exception to the general prohibition on propensity evidence is crafted primarily for "signature" crimes with a common modus operandi. Indeed, our decisions have cautioned that evidence of prior misconduct offered to bolster a key witness's testimony as to the current charge, although often probative on that point, is also quite prejudicial. In any event, the jury in this case did not and could not know all of the record in the Crandall trial. Percy was the only witness conclusively placing Thompson at the scene. Evidence of Prior Uncharged Misconduct. 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." Percy's testimony about the Crandall murder was thus introduced to prove an important element of the State's case -- that Thompson had access to the murder weapon before the killings at Hillis Auto Sales. Indeed, our decisions have cautioned that evidence of prior misconduct offered to bolster a key witness's testimony as to the current charge, although often probative on that point, is also quite prejudicial. Percy Douglas Thompson was born circa 1889, to Henry Maxwell Thompson and Jannet Isabella Watson. 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. Wesley Crandall was a small time marihuana dealer; they went there in a pick-up truck, and Jerry Thompson took his shotgun along. This occurred with the apparent assent of all counsel. I don't think [Rule] 404 precludes the obtaining of the weapon, so the State will be allowed to introduce evidence of the obtaining of the weapon." Who does [the State] say was with Jerry Thompson on March 14th of 1991, at Hillis Auto Sales? In June 1991, defendant Jerry Thompson and Douglas Percy were driving through Illinois and were stopped for a traffic violation. We first examine what went on in the trial court. It could be argued that the evidentiary errors during the guilt phase were therefore harmless. Indeed, the prohibition on use of prior misconduct to prove a criminal charge is "a basic tenet of criminal evidence law older than the republic itself . 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. The relevance and balancing issues are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. 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). The defense asked jurors to think about what somebody's got to gain when they testify. 534, 539, 166 N.E.2d 864, 866 (1960) (in prosecution for burglary, erroneous admission of defendant's alleged involvement in prior burglaries required new trial). The propensity evidence in this case crossed that line by a wide margin. 5. They are far from justifying irrelevant and highly prejudicial evidence that has no relation to that point or to any other material fact in dispute. Id. See, e.g., Watson v. State, 540 N.E.2d 598 (Ind.1989) (testimony concerning prior robbery was admissible in murder trial because the defendant had stolen the same type of pistol used to kill the victim); United States v. Day, 591 F.2d 861 (D.C.Cir.1978) (evidence of prior robbery was properly allowed where the murder weapon was taken during the robbery and was later found in the house where the defendant was arrested).9 The issue, however, is whether that discretion was abused in the quantity and quality of the evidence admitted to corroborate Percy's testimony on this collateral point. If the extraneous details of the killing were inadmissible in Ostrowsky-a case involving car theft-the prejudice to Thompson in a second murder prosecution is an a fortiori case. 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. ON OCTOBER 27, 2002, THOMPSON WAS FOUND DEAD IN THE RECREATION AREA OF A CELLBLOCK ON "X ROW" AT THE INDIANA STATE PRISON IN MICHIGAN CITY, INDIANA. Id. The admissibility of the Crandall murder evidence was contested from the outset. 6. On February 14, 1991, he and Thompson went to Crandall's house to buy marijuana. 1978) (evidence of prior robbery was properly allowed where the murder weapon was taken during the robbery and was later found in the house where the defendant was arrested).See footnote 9 The issue, however, is whether that discretion was abused in the quantity and quality of the evidence admitted to corroborate Percy's testimony on this collateral point. Includes Address (14) Phone (8) Email (7) See Results. Although this testimony was admitted only to show that the gun had been in Thompson's possession before the crimes in this case, the State was allowed to elicit significant details of the prior murder and to establish that Thompson was convicted for it. Select this result to view Douglas A Percy's phone number, address, and more. 9. Percy's testimony about the Crandall murder was thus introduced to prove an important element of the State's case-that Thompson had access to the murder weapon before the killings at Hillis Auto Sales. We cannot conclude that these evidentiary errors were harmless. 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. . Sixty people were indicted in federal court for their roles in a conspiracy to bring heroin from Chicago and Atlanta and sell it throughout Greater Cleveland, law enforcement officials announced . Moreover, the State emphasized the prior misconduct in its opening statement, during the case in chief, and again in its closing argument. Mar 3, 2022 Mar 3, 2022; Facebook; Twitter; WhatsApp; SMS; . . Indeed, the jury could have convicted Thompson on Percy's testimony alone. Thompson retrieved a pillow from another room, placed it over Crandall's head, and fired. . Their license was verified as active when we last checked. It also placed Percy himself at each of these crime scenes. Sometime after that 2 retarded men were coerced into admitting that they killed Wesley Crandall, were convicted; they went to prison, and but, for Doug Percy coming forward, they would probably still be there. 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 rules of evidence require courts to guard against exploitation of those details. Although this testimony was admitted only to show that the gun had been in Thompson's possession before the crimes in this case, the State was allowed to elicit significant details of the prior murder and to establish that Thompson was convicted for it. 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. . And, who does [the State] say was in Illinois in June of 1991, when [Thompson] was stopped by [Illinois police]? Ostrowsky, 501 F.2d at 324. 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. Under these circumstances, the errors were not harmless.See footnote 11 See Wickizer v. State, 626 N.E.2d 795, 800-01 (Ind. Although the State conceded that Percy had some culpability in both crimes, Percy's role was distinguished from Thompson's: All of us know Doug Percy is not blameless in this, and at the very least, he assisted Jerry Thompson, after these horrible murders were committed [T]he Evidence shows that [Percy] did nothing to kill either of those 3 men. On cross-examination, the defense did not directly challenge Percy's account of what happened in New Castle. See also Swanson v. State, 666 N.E.2d 397 (Ind.1996) (although common-law doctrine of res gestae did not survive enactment of Indiana Rules of Evidence, facts that are part of the story of the crime are admissible if relevant within the meaning of Evidence Rule 401). Lockhart v. Nelson, 488 U.S. 33, 109 S. Ct. 285, 102 L. Ed. Jerry as Percy Frank's Father as Toby Bart (from The Simpsons) as Duck Carl (from The Simpsons) as Donald Lenny (from The Simpsons) as Douglas Milhouse (from The Simpsons) as Oliver Nelson (from The Simpsons) as Diesel Skipper (from Skipper & Skeeto) as Skarloey Skeeto (from Skipper & Skeeto) as Rheneas Evidence of Prior Uncharged Misconduct 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. The convictions must be reversed because a fair trial is required for every defendant, regardless of his apparent guilt or the magnitude of the crimes he may have committed. Ostrowsky, 501 F.2d at 324. What particular parts of this mass might be fair rebuttal will, of course, depend on how the two parties elect to shape the presentation of their principal cases. In brief, Percy testified that he and Thompson went to Crandall's house that day to purchase marijuana and that Thompson assaulted and shot Crandall.See footnote 6 Thompson then stole several of Crandall's guns, one of which Percy identified at trial as the same handgun recovered in the car search in Illinois in June. 1989) (testimony concerning prior robbery was admissible in murder trial because the defendant had stolen the same type of pistol used to kill the victim); United States v. Day, 591 F.2d 861 (D.C. Cir. Specifically, prospective jurors were informed, verbatim, of the four aggravating circumstances the State had pleaded against Thompson in the death penalty information. Ct. App. In March 1992, Percy approached Indianapolis police with . We first take up an issue not raised by the parties. There is enormous potential for prejudice in the guilt phase if the jury is permitted to know from the outset, in a murder case, that the defendant is a convicted killer. Please try again. 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. 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. It is valid as a logical proposition only if one has an understanding of all the dynamics of the Crandall trial. Stay up-to-date with how the law affects your life. 0. 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. In its opening argument, the State outlined the events surrounding the Hillis and Beeler murders, and then explained Percy's delayed decision to come forward to tell police what he knew about Thompson's involvement. 1991) ("bootstrapping" testimony related to extrinsic acts is admissible but only to the extent it is relevant to a material fact). There are 10+ professionals named "Doug Percy", who use LinkedIn to exchange information, ideas, and opportunities. If so, the jury necessarily learns of the aggravating circumstance in the course of the guilt phase. The State emphasized the details of Crandall's killing from the beginning. However, the jury's apparent decision to believe Percy may have turned on the wrongly admitted evidence. 1996). In the end, an impermissible flood of damaging propensity evidence washed away Thompson's right to a fair trial. He worked in the kitchens and as a driver and mechanic. United States v. Burke, 948 F.2d 23 (1st Cir. 11. However, double jeopardy forbids a retrial -- even where the defendant requests it as here -- if the reviewing court concludes that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction. Leonard v. United States, 378 U.S. 544, 84 S.Ct. Thompson filed a motion in limine before trial objecting to the admission of any evidence related to Crandall's death, including the fact of Thompson's conviction for that murder. Rather than telling the jury to disregard the disputed evidence completely because it was not admissible for any purpose, the limiting instruction here instructed the jury to limit its consideration of prior acts to identity. 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. "See footnote 5 Brewer, 275 Ind. 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. Percy was the only witness conclusively placing Thompson at the scene. Access to the murder weapon, particularly where the evidence is circumstantial as in this case, is such a permissible purpose. in the event that any such attack may open the door to the use of such evidence." That charge was eventually dismissed in exchange for Percy's testifying about the deaths of Hillis and Beeler. There is nothing in the record indicating on what basis it was admitted into evidence over Thompson's objection. Cf. In this review, we do not reweigh evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses. 7. The Marine officer who was named a "person of the week" in 2009 when she became the first-ever aircraft commander of Marine One -- the presidential chopper -- has been fired from her current post . Because the State was properly allowed to show that Thompson stole the murder weapon from Crandall, whether Crandall actually had a gun similar to that weapon at the time he was killed was also relevant. The State responds that a portrayal of the Crandall murder was not prohibited by Rule 404(b) because it helped prove Thompson's identity as the killer. Jerry is related to Virginia Ann Thompson . Observing that Thompson had challenged Percy's credibility in opening arguments, the State maintained that some detail was needed to give the jury sufficient context in which to understand, and therefore credit, Percy's testimony about how Thompson acquired the gun used to kill Hillis and Beeler. And, as Evans put it, if the aggravating circumstances are prior unrelated crimes it is necessary that the information of prior crimes be withheld from the jury until the instant case is decided. Evans, 563 N.E.2d at 1259. As the defense's opening statement put it: Who does [the State] say was with Mr. Thompson in New Castle? 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. Conviction there could have been based on forensic or other evidence wholly independent of Percy's testimony. Ind.Code 35-50-2-9(b)(1) (Supp.1990). Such evidence is highly prejudicial." 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. 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. Indeed, the prohibition on use of prior misconduct to prove a criminal charge is a basic tenet of criminal evidence law older than the republic itself. Lannan, 600 N.E.2d at 1338. Percy testified that Thompson shot Crandall. Percy carried Thompson's sawed-off shotgun into the residence. III. The serial numbers on the handgun were ground off. Without that knowledge it is impossible to conclude what, if any, validation of Percy the conviction represents. . 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. Evans, 563 N.E.2d at 1259. On March 14, 1991, Melvin Hillis and Robert Beeler were shot to death at Hillis Auto Sales in Indianapolis. 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. Wooden v. State, 657 N.E.2d 109, 111 (Ind. 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. . There is no shortage of decisions reversing convictions due to the erroneous admission of the defendant's prior criminal history, specifically prior convictions. Rather, he chose to attack Percy's credibility. The State's claim that any prejudice to Thompson was cured by a limiting instruction is unpersuasive. III. The State's fallback position, advanced at oral argument in this Court, is that all evidence related to the Crandall murder was properly admitted because Percy's credibility was under attack. His testimony was an essential element in the chain of evidence pointing to Thompson as the killer. . 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. Although corroboration of collateral facts is sometimes permissible to show credibility, see, e.g., Ind.Evidence Rule 801(d)(1)(B), corroborative proof is limited by several considerations: (1) whether the challenged witness actually testified to what is sought to be corroborated; (2) whether the corroboration helps prove a material fact (relevance); and (3) whether the corroborative evidence, assuming it is relevant, is nonetheless so prejudicial that it must be excluded under Evidence Rule 403. Despite the fact that Percy's description of Crandall's killing was largely uncontradicted and unchallenged, the State pointed to the testimony of several witnesses-the gun dealer who sold Crandall the murder weapon that Thompson eventually stole, the forensic pathologist who concluded that Crandall died of a gunshot wound to the head-to corroborate Percy's account. Inexplicably, Featheringill was also permitted to relate, Percy's account of an "execution style" shooting.See footnote 10 The fact that Crandall was killed, and how that occurred, was potentially as prejudicial as any fact can be and had no bearing on whether Thompson stole the murder weapon from Crandall that day. 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. In its effort to prove guilt, the State may not "flood the courtroom" with unnecessary and prejudicial details of prior criminal conduct merely because some of that evidence is relevant and admissible. Thompson pointed the gun at Crandall, but it made a "clicking sound" and would not fire. You can explore additional available newsletters here. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident . There is no doubt that Percy's credibility was critical to the State's case. They are far from justifying irrelevant and highly prejudicial evidence that has no relation to that point or to any other material fact in dispute. ." And, he took Wesley Crandall's guns. After testifying as to the Indianapolis victims, he also testified that Crandall had died of a gunshot wound to the head. Although Thompson conceded that he was a passenger in the car in which the murder weapon was found three months after the killings, Thompson never offered to stipulate that he had access to the murder weapon before the crimes, or to the specific fact that he stole the weapon from Crandall in February 1991. 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. Even if all the evidence related to the Crandall murder and Thompson's trial in Henry County were relevant and of probative value here, this evidence would not clear the balancing hurdle of Evidence Rule 403. 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. As Brewer held, there was no reversible error in informing the jury of that aggravator before the sentencing phase, even if reading any of the charged aggravators is neither necessary nor a desirable practice in capital cases. In and of itself, no. That's what identifies him with being associated with that gun. TermsPrivacyDisclaimerCookiesDo Not Sell My Information, Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select, Stay up-to-date with FindLaw's newsletter for legal professionals. Whether it was necessary to show that Thompson shot Crandall is a closer question, but we need not decide that point because the other material admitted clearly went beyond the pale and requires reversal. The fact of a shotgun wound could perhaps have been established by a police officer or otherwise without getting into whether it was fatal. For example, in United States v. Ostrowsky, 501 F.2d 318 (7th Cir.1974), the defendants were charged with concealing a stolen car and moving it in interstate commerce. There is no shortage of decisions reversing convictions due to the erroneous admission of the defendant's prior criminal history, specifically prior convictions. Counsel contended that the evidence was entirely consistent with Percy's having committed the murders and that his testimony has been bought and paid for, a number of ways and as such is suspect.. 1. For this reason, it has long been established that prospective jurors are not to know of prior convictions until the penalty phase. Although Percy's account of the Crandall murder in its particulars was uncontradicted and largely unchallenged, the State offered further detailed evidence about those events.
Homes For Sale In Naples, Fl Under $200 000,
Como Importar Datos De Excel A Sql Server 2014,
Mobile Homes For Sale In Country Club Estates Fairfield, Ca,
Tc Dimension Barrels For Sale,
Kiro Nights Jack Stine,
Articles D