The cited authority is distinguishable. 213439(a)(6). One of the charges against Robinson is that he killed the baby's mother, Lisa Stasi, and arranged for his brother and sister-in-law to adopt Stasi's four-month-old baby, Tiffany. Forensic odontologist Daniel Winter confirmed Trouten's identity with her known dental records. 3032 (3d ed.2007) (searches invalid on state law grounds do not invariably require suppression of evidence). In October 1999, Trouten traveled to Kansas City, telling her mother she had an interview with Robinson. State v. Noah, 246 Kan. 291, 293, 788 P.2d 257 (1990) (K.S.A. A few days after Trouten had supposedly left for California, Carolyn Trouten received a letter from her daughter. We defer to the trial court's discretion regarding the need to protect juror privacy in this case. Judge Anderson agreed the comments were troubling but did not believe they were going to be a factor with the other panel members. Thus it had to prove not only that [defendant] had the general intent to take or confine a person by force, threat, or deception, but also that he had the specific intent to inflict bodily injury or to terrorize the victim or another. State v. Becker, 290 Kan. 842, 852, 235 P.3d 424 (2010). 11 does not focus on a crime, which is problematic because the instruction is intended to assist jurors in deciding where the crimes occurred. 129, sec. Vickie Neufeld was from Texas and had lost her job as a geriatric therapist. This definition is consistent with Federal Rule of Evidence 1003, which provides that [a] duplicate is admissible to the same extent as the original unless a genuine question is raised about the original's authenticity or the circumstances make it unfair to admit the duplicate. A duplicate is defined as a counterpart produced by a mechanical, photographic, chemical, electronic, or other equivalent process or technique that accurately reproduces the original. Fed R. Evid. [COUNSEL]: You have no personal knowledge of that, nor does your examination reveal the position of the arm at the time that it was broken; is that true? Defense counsel claimed it needed as much as a year to adequately prepare this case for trial and requested the setting be moved from January 14 to September 16, 2002. Comments before the Seventeenth Panel, Robinson also highlights comments the prosecutor made while examining the seventeenth panel. . 16. While attending Purdue, Lewicka became friends with Dawn Carter and often used her computer to access the Internet. United States v. Simmons, 961 F.2d 183, 184 (11th Cir.1992). See State v. Vaughn, 254 Kan. 191, Syl. See Durbish, 234 Kan. at 717 (specific intent may be shown by acts, circumstances, and inferences reasonably deducible from them). 6. Robinson makes clear his challenge arises under the second part of the framework, arbitrary enforcement. The defense made the following inquiries during voir dire of Young: [COUNSEL]: Do you have any idea where that hand or arm was at the time that injury was inflicted? He . Can you be a great dad when you're in prison? Did the prosecutor improperly attack Nancy Robinson? During this search, law enforcement also seized a number of items belonging to Trouten. Moreover, this doctrine does not apply if no error or only one error supports reversal. 284 Kan. at 572. See State v. Yates, No. Robinson argues the prosecutor interfered with his exercise of peremptory challenges by infecting several small group panels with misstatements of law. Lyla Thompson, a deputy with the JOCO Lab, developed several latent fingerprints from the other SSA checks that matched Robinson's known prints. Stapleton testified that Suzette Trouten told him she was moving to Kansas to undergo cancer treatment. Dillehay did not attempt to extrapolate these findings as support for the broader proposition that Robinson advances herethat anyone who forms an opinion of the case is thereafter unalterably tainted and rendered unqualified to serve as a juror. The body of the message is identical to State's Exhibit 11, which was authenticated independently through Remington's proffer. 223408 and K.S.A. 2. 2. After identifying this injury, prosecutor Morrison asked, Would that be consistent with a defensive wound? Defense counsel objected, arguing the question called for speculation. State v. Martinez, 290 Kan. 992, 1009, 236 P.3d 481 (2010) (citing State v. Dixon, 289 Kan. 46, 69, 209 P.3d 675 [2009] ). The Court of Appeals panel in State v. Englund, 50 Kan.App.2d 123, 135, 329 P.3d 502 (2014), reached the same conclusion: When we consider K.S.A. She was pregnant at the time. The reason that we're using the numbers is that we want to make sure that your integrity is preserved while you're serving as jurors on this case and to help in these admonitions so that we don't have to sequester you in the evening hours and on the weekends., Now, this is designed to prevent you from being exposed inadvertently or against your will by anyone that might want to impose themselves upon you during the pendency of the case with respect to the admonition issues; overzealous media persons, for example, and I don't mean to single out the media, but that's just an example. 660, 67577, 637 A.2d 117 (1994) (refusal to allow case-specific questioning on aggravating circumstances consistent with Morgan ); Holland v. State, 705 So.2d 307, 33839 (Miss.1997) (jurors cannot be asked to give weight to aggravators during voir dire); Witter v. State, 112 Nev. 908, 91516, 921 P.2d 886 (1996) (case-specific questions regarding statutory aggravator would have improperly staked out jurors and were not required under Morgan or Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510, 51923, 88 S.Ct. He wrote to Marty, her brother, told him to let the bank take the car back. The prosecution did and confirmed he held no firm opinion of guilt. The district judge granted the motion and ordered those jurors excused, with the proviso that that does not relieve them from the obligation on the summons Neither Robinson, in his motion, nor Judge Anderson, in his ruling, specifically identified Juror 147 as one of those excused for failure to appear. Defendant did not challenge Juror 87 for cause. Thank you.. at 2769 (Breyer, J., dissenting). at 2759 (Breyer, J., dissenting). In affirming the denial of continuance, we explained: [S]imply arguing that there may be an issue worthy of another motion is insufficient to justify a continuance. After the ruling, the prosecutor immediately explained that the State's argument was that Stasi would not have voluntarily relinquished her parental rightsan inference reasonably supported by the evidence. See Goss v. Nelson, 439 F.3d 621, 627 (10th Cir.2006) (jurors qualified where they can set aside personal opinions and decide on evidence). In every relevant category (case recognition, opinion of guilt, and strength of evidence), the survey responses in Carr revealed case recognition and prejudgment at levels higher than or equal to those in this case. The district judge not only found that the prosecutor had established a good-faith basis for his questioning, but also ruled appropriately that the inquiry was calculated to elicit relevant evidence impeaching Nancy Robinson's testimony regarding Robinson's character as a good grandfather. A reasonable juror could conclude from the State's evidence that the murders of Trouten and Lewicka both occurred after July 1, 1994, the effective date of K.S.A. It is for you to determine what, if any, weight you give. at 18. at 2757 (Breyer, J., dissenting). To satisfy substantive due process requirements, the court's actions must not be applied to parties in an arbitrary or capricious manner. But life in prison without possibility of parole is no less incapacitating. While exploring death penalty views with Juror 542, Robinson's counsel asked whether as a father of a young daughter, this juror could serve impartially, knowing Robinson was charged with killing young, teenage women. The prosecutor complied, defining mitigating circumstances in a manner that drew no further objection. Robinson said Stasi thanked him for the assistance and said she had made other arrangements. The affidavit detailed law enforcement's extensive investigation of Robinson and described facts uncovered through the use of a variety of traditional investigatory techniques, including surveillance of witnesses and the defendant, warrantless trash searches, consensual searches, investigatory interviews, inquisitional subpoenas, and analysis of pen register data. During that call, Robinson identified himself as Jim. Later that afternoon, law enforcement intercepted another telephone call from Robinson, posing as Jim Turner, to Remington. As to the second challenged statement, a careful reading of the record suggests prosecutor Morrison, who was questioning Juror 344 at the time, was actually reading or summarizing the veniremember's questionnaire response, not explaining the sentencing process to veniremembers. Atwell informed the court he could not accept appointment without a continuance. The law specifies when the death penalty is appropriate. As a preliminary matter, it should be clarified that Judge Anderson did not use an anonymous jury selection procedure in the true sense of that word, where juror identities are withheld from the public and parties alike. See State v. Paxton, 201 Kan. 353, 359, 440 P.2d 650 (1968); State v. Burden, 30 Kan.App.2d 690, 697, 46 P.3d 570, rev'd on other grounds 275 Kan. 934, 69 P.3d 1120 (2002). John became an Eagle scout and supposedly traveled to London with some of the scouts and performed in front of the Queen in 1957. Trouten completed a passport application. Courts or governors are 130 times more likely to exonerate a defendant where a death penalty is at issue and 9 times more likely where capital murder, rather than noncapital murder, is at issue. Law enforcement officers seized several books purchased from A. Judge Anderson declined, finding the terms were not particularly difficult for a lay person to resolve. In ruling on Robinson's challenge, the district judge found: In this case, McClain investigated Robinson and filed criminal charges against him for theft on March 29, 1985 in what was referred to at the hearing as the Back Care case (Case No. Robinson cites Hance v. Zant, 696 F.2d 940 (11th Cir.1983), overruled in part on other grounds by Brooks v. Kemp, 762 F.2d 1383 (11th Cir.1985), in support of his claim of error. See State v. Longoria, 301 Kan. 489, 525, 343 P.2d 1128 (2015). However, to the extent Robinson's argument is dependent on an interpretation of the aggravating circumstances statute, we review his challenge de novo. 214624(e) (defendant shall be sentenced to death if existence of aggravating circumstances is not outweighed by mitigating circumstances); see Pruett v. Commonwealth, 232 Va. 266, 281, 351 S.E.2d 1 (1986) (juror's leaning toward the death penalty did not demonstrate substantial impairment when response made against the backdrop of the worst possible scenario under circumstances which likely would prompt a similar statement from other prospective jurors). It is speculative to presume from the record that Debbie Faith saw Robinson kill her mother. 222401a(10)(a). Here, defendant failed to show Juror 39 was exposed to or affected by the type of uniquely prejudicial information at issue in Yurk. The defense lodged no objection. Edward T. Robinson, Jr., 78, of Bayville, died peacefully on Wednesday, July 27, 2022, with his loving family at his bedside. It creates the potential for multiple punishments for a single crime, offending the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Section 10 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights. In light of all of the factors, researchers estimate that about 4% of those sentenced to death are actually innocent. 135 S.Ct. We hold Judge Anderson's ruling to be fairly supported by the record. He didn't cry when there was testimony about Suzette Troutenwhen her family testifiedwhen her body was taken out of that barrel or Beverly Bonner or Sheila Faith or Debbie Faith. On October 4, the prosecution subpoenaed documents from Ray, and in response, correctional officials searched Ray's cell and found documents responsive to the subpoena. 222502(a). However, Robinson challenged 19 of these 27 based on death penalty views and 8 on grounds related to bias arising from exposure to media coverage. See Hicks v. Collins, 384 F.3d 204, 223 (6th Cir.2004) (Because Ohio law requires a separate, post-recommendation finding by the trial judge confirming the jury's sentence, this court has held that casting the jury's decision as a recommendation is not an inaccurate statement of Ohio law and therefore does not violate Caldwell.). 1. At preliminary hearing, Mattingly testified on cross-examination that she never received any complaints from other renters about noises or smells from Robinson's storage units. This we cannot do. Given this testimony, Robinson believes Judge Anderson's finding that voir dire could overcome community bias is unsupported by record evidence. Evidence is relevant when it has any tendency in reason to prove any material fact. K.S.A. Brown also made brief reference to two companies connected to Robinson, Equi II and Equruz II, that utilized a name similar to Equi-plus, Robinson's company implicated in the Back Care case. The only requirement Harris recognizes is that the murders be related to one another in some way. The common motive and short time between criminal acts merely happened to be the factors showing the relatedness of the murders in Harris. Several items were also immediately identifiable as Lewicka's, including her Polish passport, Kansas driver's license, Social Security card, resident alien card, Olathe Public Library card, high school diploma, Indiana vehicle registration, and a document appointing Robinson as her power of attorney. A vague law impermissibly delegates basic policy matters to policemen, judges, and juries for resolution on an ad hoc and subjective basis, with the attendant dangers of arbitrary and discriminatory application. 276 Kan. at 822 (quoting Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 10809, 92 S.Ct. First, Brown made a passing reference to Robinson's convictions in the Back Care and Kuti cases, the former of which Judge McClain handled through the preliminary hearing. The district judge's reference to the delay that followed Thomas' entry of appearance and the appointment of cocounsel was an accurate account. L.1994, ch. John's father was an alcoholic and his mother was a disciplinarian. See State v. Kleypas, 272 Kan. 894, 108788, 40 P.3d 139 (2001), cert. Given its collective experience discerning the plain language of statutes, what should jump out at the majority is that, first and foremost, the crime requires the State to prove the killing of more than one person. Pointedly, the legislature did not say that capital murder is the killing of one person after having previously killed one or more other persons. As such, the district judge's erroneous venue instruction does not constitute clear error. a trial court need not define every word or phrase in the instructions. Later that same day, Robinson filed his second motion for continuance, arguing that counsel Berrigan and O'Brien (appointed counsel) and Thomas (retained counsel) had an agreement as to the division of labor in the case, whereby retained counsel was handling the guilt phase and appointed counsel the penalty phase. Therefore, if Kleypas was wrongly decided, and the Supreme Court of the United States says it was, then the correct decision in Kleypas would have been to uphold the statute as written. On May 22, 2000, Neufeld asked Robinson to return her sex toys, but he did not comply. Nevertheless, even using the majority's liberal concept of nexus, Trouten's murder does not fit. 1499 (2013); Com. Robinson argues the ruling violates Kleypas, 272 Kan. 894. Learn more about FindLaws newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. 3. Law enforcement officers searched Lewicka's Edgebrook Apartment on October 12, 2000. Robinson argues the curative instruction was ineffective because before making inquiry of each juror, Judge Anderson assured each that he or she had done nothing wrong. Witt clarified that the appropriate standard for excusal included instances where a juror's views substantially impaired his or her ability to serve impartially, even if it did not prevent it outright. Edward G. Robinson (born Emanuel Goldenberg; December 12, 1893 - January 26, 1973) was a Romanian-American actor of stage and screen, who was popular during Hollywood's Golden Age.He appeared in 30 Broadway plays and more than 100 films during a 50-year career and is best remembered for his tough-guy roles as gangsters in such films as Little Caesar and Key Largo. In Caldwell, the prosecutor told the jury that its sentencing decision was not final because it was subject to appellate review. Trouten provided the information in a reply e-mail. 214652(2) applies to all of the murders identified in the capital charges and hold that the State's evidence was sufficient to support the existence of the multiple murders aggravating circumstance. To the extent the court employs a harmless error analysis as part of the prejudice inquiry, we have described the standard as follows: Thus, the standard of review and the ultimate question that must be answered with regard to whether prosecutorial misconduct in the penalty phase of a capital trial was harmless is whether the court is able to find beyond a reasonable doubt that the prosecutorial misconduct, viewed in the light of the record as a whole, had little, if any, likelihood of changing the jury's ultimate conclusion regarding the weight of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Based on the foregoing analysis, we agree with Judge Anderson's legal conclusion that Judge McClain was a neutral and detached magistrate. See K.S.A. 222503; limitation on territorial jurisdiction applies to district magistrate judges only). Robinson was also involved in the lives of his grandchildren, the appeal said. These envelopes were preaddressed to members of Trouten's family, with S. Over the next 2 weeks, Robinson brought additional furnishings, including bedding and pillows, blankets, kitchen utensils, artwork, and hundreds of books. 5. As with other victims, family members received suspicious correspondence after Lewicka disappeared. The State concedes the error. 255 Kan. at 84. K.S.A. Robinson argues these remarks were improper because they communicated the theme that Nancy Robinson's pleas to spare her husband's life should be disregarded because the prosecutor held her in suspicion.. Robinson said he needed a corporate apartment for employees he would train before they were transferred to positions out of state. In fact, defense counsel fought vigorously to exclude Shields' testimony for good reasonthese facts were detrimental to his mitigation case. However, the Superior Court did not find that the prosecutor had engaged in misconduct by exploring this line of questioning, and it did not suggest that the prosecutor lacked a good-faith basis for such questions. Though married to Nancy since 1964, Robinsons infidelity was an ongoing issue in their marriage. Robinson argues the prosecutor committed prejudicial misconduct by discussing the letter sent to Stasi's brother, Marty Elledge, because it was not admitted into evidence. The majority is apparently implying that the defendant was guilty of the capital murder of Trouten and the capital murder of Lewicka and that the murders of the four other women simply served as proof of a common scheme or course of conduct. During this call, he said Trouten had stolen his credit cards and withdrawn money from his accounts, and that his private investigator had learned Trouten was in Mexico. We agree the remark was improper, but on different grounds. During this phase, Judge Anderson called prospective jurors in panels of 60 to identify those asserting hardship. Other than her body, there was little evidence connecting Lewicka's murder to Linn County. Is there any evidence that the things [the victim] told you didn't happen? 278 Kan. at 92. Instruction No. It identified facts suggesting Robinson had targeted new potential victims in the BDS & M community, including Trouten's friends, Remington and Taylor, as well as J.M. Robinson built a family of his own. Stasi said they were claiming that Betty Stasi planned to take Tiffany away because Stasi was an unfit mother. An indirect comment may also violate the privilege where the language used was manifestly intended or was of such a character that the jury would necessarily take it to be a comment on the failure of the accused to testify. McKinney, 272 Kan. at 347. 621830 granted both magistrates and judges the authority to issue search warrants executable statewide. See, e.g., State v. Hamilton, 74 Kan. 461, 466, 87 P. 363 (1906) (The presumption is in favor of the competency of the juror, and the burden of showing that good cause exists for the challenge rests upon the one who makes the challenge.). Though William Bonner worked as the prison doctor at the Western Missouri Correctional Center in Cameron, Missouri, and treated Robinson as a patient while Robinson was incarcerated at this facility, the State did not elicit this testimony. 1190, 108 L.Ed.2d 316 (1990). Robinson claimed she had met a man named Jim Turner and left town with him. Davis never met Bonner and only saw Robinson access the mailbox. Robinson points to nothing in the record evidencing such confusion among Robinson's jurors. The State provided substantial evidence in support of its first theory of taking by deception. I am requiring that that not be rolled into and brought up in the midst of a comparison between the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, because I do believe that the fashion which it's been raised during the last session Wednesday is tantamount to testing the jury to determine whether the specific, albeit very brief, factual allegations of the State would be weighed by the jury against the very generic mitigating circumstance without the factual comparison which we can't do because we are essentially getting into taking a vote on death penalty issues when we start doing that which would produce a juror that essentially would vote favorably for the defense and we are staking out the jury when we get to that point. 3:06CV0167, 2010 WL 5092705, at *49 (N.D.Ohio 2010) (unpublished opinion) (in capital murder proceeding, the prosecutor's comment characterizing the murders as the most cold-blooded calculated inhumane murder fell within the latitude permitted to both parties), vacated and remanded on other grounds 756 F.3d 477 (6th Cir.2014). He was found guilty in 2003 for three murders committed in and around Kansas City, Kansas, receiving the death sentence for two of them. Robinson eventually married Nancy Jo Lynch and the couple had four children. Santa Barbara Estates was not a gated community, and there was no physical barrier impeding access into the area. at 240. Morrison's comments on the content of the letter to Elledge did little, if anything, to bolster this evidence. Again, Cathy Norman was victim Sheila Faith's sister. Neither the Petition nor the Decree was found in the district court clerk's official records. At trial, Ponce examined the envelopes Trouten's family had received and said they were consistent with the ones she had mailed from Veracruz and that the writing on the return address appeared to be her own. The argument is misplaced. 213439(a)(6). At Robinsons direction, Donald sent him a $2,500 cashiers check payable to Robinsons business, Equi II, allegedly to cover adoption-related fees. After securing the warrant, Linn County Sheriff's Deputy Kevin Danciak arrived at Robinson's Linn County property around 9:30 a.m., just as officers from Lenexa and Overland Park were arriving. Remington confirmed these exhibits were true and accurate copies of the original messages she observed on her computer screen. The district court's conclusion is reviewed de novo. See United States v. Paccione, 949 F.2d 1183, 1193 (2d Cir.1991) (no prejudice from juror numbers where court instructed jury at outset of trial that precautions designed to protect jury from contact by the media); United States v. Thomas, 757 F.2d 1359, 1365 (2d Cir.1985) (the explanation that jurors were not to reveal their names to protect them from the press substantially avoided any risk of aspersions on the defendants); State v. Flournoy, 535 N.W.2d 354, 362 (Minn.1995) (trial court minimized prejudicial inferences by informing jurors that purpose of anonymity was to guard against extensive trial publicity), cert. It did not say that capital murder is the killing of one person as part of a common scheme or course of conduct involving the killing of others. Also, the State's evidence of Robinson's planning and preparation to kill Trouten and conceal her disappearance is probative of his specific intent to inflict bodily injury. Specifically, Robinson contends the district judge erred in fact, thereby burdening the right to counsel of choice, by: (1) finding that Robinson had discharged the DPDU; (2) minimizing the burden defense counsel experienced in managing discovery; and (3) failing to account for the delay caused by the State's tardy and disorganized DNA testing disclosures. 923 (1884). 222503 and K.S.A. See United States v. Darden, 70 F.3d 1507, 1533 (8th Cir.1995) (no violation of fair trial rights where court told the venirepersons that they were being identified by numbers rather than their names so that members of the media would not ask them questions; explanation provided a reasonable safeguard against undue prejudice); Perez v. People, 302 P.3d 222, 226 (Colo.) (use of juror numbers did not undermine presumption of innocence where intended to protect privacy and nothing suggested defendant's guilt or dangerousness), cert. Did voir dire prove ineffective to overcome prejudice? Defense counsel seemed to realize the oversight, withdrawing his line of questioning and abandoning the argument. He wanted me to give up my family and my grandkids or my grandchild and come and work with him and live with him.. See Hurd, 298 Kan. at 571 (trial judge comments that defendant was a violent man, the best place for [him] is in prison, and that he showed a complete inability to follow the rules' did not establish due process violation when made in reference to his extensive criminal history); Schoonover, 281 Kan. at 51617 (magistrate who formerly represented defendant and called him a low life was neutral and detached where he did not rely on information outside the affidavit, which clearly established probable cause); State v. Griffen, 241 Kan. 68, 7172, 734 P.2d 1089 (1987) (district judge referring to defendant as a mean mother, when explaining the case background to new defense counsel, while ill-advised, did not demonstrate bias and prejudice). The results speak for themselves. Refusal to Strike Entire Panel Exposed to Juror 173's Comments. Because the State's two theories as to how Robinson took Trouten could support but one conviction, rather than two, Count I and the State's evidence supporting it did not constitute a multiple acts case. 60467(a). Although it was unusual to approach a civil judge for an inquisition, Morrison felt there was a strong possibility he would later request pen registers and wiretaps, so he wanted to begin proceedings with the wiretap judge.
Lincoln County, Wyoming Warrant List,
Average Size Of Male Organ In Pakistan,
Which Of The Following Is An Inductive Argument?,
Tuscany Village Henderson Hoa Fees,
General Motors Hiring Process After Drug Test,
Articles N