143 results for 'cat:"Jury" AND cat:"Murder"'.
J. Lanzinger finds the trial court's jury instruction on self-defense during defendant's trial on murder charges was properly worded and did not confuse the jury. It included language that unequivocally informed the jury the state was required to disprove defendant's theory of the case by a preponderance of evidence, as required under Ohio law. Additionally, the flight instruction given to the jury was not prejudicial, as the trial court included a disclaimer that defendant's decision to run from the scene did not indicate a presumption of guilt, but could only be used to indicate his consciousness of guilt. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Lanzinger, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-2234, Categories: murder, Self Defense, jury Instructions
J. Leahy finds that the lower court erred when it denied a woman's extramarital romantic partner his request to provide criminal pattern jury instruction concerning the voluntariness of his statements to law enforcement. This comes after the second jury trial for the partner in which he was convicted of second degree murder of the woman's husband. However, the lower court did not violate the partner's double jeopardy rights when it entered evidence of premeditation and conspiracy because the same evidence was used for the murder conviction, and that evidence was sufficient for that conviction. Reversed in part.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Leahy, Filed On: June 29, 2023, Case #: 12-77-06-C, Categories: Criminal Procedure, murder, jury Instructions
J. Hutchinson finds the trial court improperly convicted defendant for aggravated battery with a firearm and second-degree murder. The jury was mistakenly provided with the state’s closing argument PowerPoint presentation during deliberations. It cannot be said that the error and resulting prejudice was “harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.” Reversed.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Hutchinson , Filed On: June 28, 2023, Case #: 2-22-0178, Categories: Firearms, jury, murder
J. Meehan finds that defendant is entitled to resentencing on attempted murder, assault and other charges due to changes to the Determinate Sentencing Law that limit trial court discretion to impose an upper term. Resentencing is required unless the upper term remains valid under federal and state law and the trial court would have imposed the upper term sentences under the new law. Vacated in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Meehan, Filed On: June 26, 2023, Case #: F083577, Categories: jury, murder, Sentencing
J. Kafker vacates defendant's conviction for the murder of his girlfriend, whom he chopped to death with a machete. The trial court improperly failed to instruct the jury on the impact of mental impairment or intoxication to determine whether defendant acted in a cruel and atrocious manner. Vacated.
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Court, Judge: Kafker, Filed On: June 26, 2023, Case #: SJC-13225 , Categories: murder, jury Instructions
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Baldwin finds that the lower court properly applied the doctrine of res judicata when it denied defendant's motion for postconviction relief from his murder convictions. He provided no evidence to support his claim of jury bias as a result of excessive publicity and made only conclusory statements to support his arguments. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Baldwin, Filed On: June 26, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-2103, Categories: Criminal Procedure, jury, murder
J. Carbullido finds that a trial court properly convicted defendant of murder and use of a deadly weapon in the shooting death of a man involved in a fight with defendant. The decision to exclude videos showing that people other than defendant would have reason to want the victim dead was proper, as the videos ran the risk of confusing the jury and would not have provided an alternative reason for why defendant was found with the murder weapon. The court did err by allowing several witnesses to invoke the Fifth Amendment, but any testimony they could have given was unlikely to weaken other evidence against defendant. Excluding potential jurors over 65 years old did not affect the trial outcome as community members over 65 are allowed to claim exemption, especially under Covid-19 safety protocols in effect during the trial. Affirmed.
Court: Guam Supreme Court, Judge: Carbullido, Filed On: June 22, 2023, Case #: CRA21-3, Categories: jury, murder, Weapons
[Consolidated.] J. Boggs finds that the trial court properly convicted defendants of murder, participation in criminal street gang activity, aggravated assault and other offenses. Sufficient evidence was presented to support defendants' convictions. The trial court did not violate the continuing witness rule by allowing the jury to watch surveillance videos in the jury room during deliberations. The trial court correctly denied two defendants' motions for a mistrial based on the failure to exclude evidence found on one defendant's phone. Two defendants' motions to sever their trials from each other and from their co-defendants were also correctly denied. Any error the trial court committed in failing to give defendants' attorneys a chance to provide input on questions submitted by the jury via notes was harmless. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: Boggs, Filed On: June 21, 2023, Case #: S23A0316, Categories: jury, murder, Gangs
J. Peterson finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of murder and aggravated assault for driving his truck into several pedestrians after a bar fight, killing two of them and seriously injuring a third. The trial court correctly refused to remove a juror who revealed, after already being selected for the jury, that he thought he had once been convicted of a felony. A report on the juror's criminal history showed that he was not a convicted felon and defendant failed to challenge the juror under the statute or argue that the juror was disqualified for any alleged impairment in his ability to be fair and impartial. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: Peterson, Filed On: June 21, 2023, Case #: S23A0733, Categories: jury, murder, Assault
J. Ellington finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of murder and did not commit any error in failing to charge the jury on voluntary manslaughter and mutual combat. Neither the victim's decision to bring a weapon into defendant's home nor the victim's alleged use of threatening words and racial epithets amount to the types of provocation that could support a voluntary manslaughter charge. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: Ellington, Filed On: June 21, 2023, Case #: S23A0531, Categories: murder, jury Instructions
J. Gallagher finds the trial court properly denied defendant's motion for a jury instruction on self-defense during his murder trial, as he was entirely at fault for creating the situation that led to the shooting. Defendant incessantly called and texted his ex-girlfriend for hours before showing up to her house with a loaded gun, then repeatedly told her and the victim to come outside, and shot the victim in the back as he ran away. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gallagher, Filed On: June 15, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-1970, Categories: murder, Self Defense, jury Instructions
J. Gallagher finds defendant's due process rights were not violated by the trial court's transferred intent instruction to the jury during his trial on murder, firearms, riot and assault charges. The instruction, which dealt with whether defendant intended to shoot one of the victims of his crime, applied only to his murder charges, of which he was found not guilty. Meanwhile, the trial court properly denied defendant's request for a lesser-included offense of reckless assault because his use of a gun during the commission of his crimes precluded the chance he acted recklessly. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gallagher, Filed On: June 15, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-1977, Categories: murder, jury Instructions
J. O'Leary finds that the trial court provided the jury in defendant's first degree murder trial with clear, unambiguous instructions on provocation, premeditation and deliberation. Ample evidence that he returned to a car, retrieved two knives and pursued the victim on foot over an extended distance showed he had plenty of time to reflect and that the killing was deliberate and premeditated. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: O'Leary, Filed On: June 14, 2023, Case #: G061077, Categories: Evidence, murder, jury Instructions
J. Bunn, in response to the Monongalia County Circuit Court’s certified question as to whether a jury’s failure to unanimously decide the recommendation of mercy allows the court to impose the life sentence required for all first-degree murder convictions, answers “No.” The court holds in keeping with trial phase in a first-degree murder case a jury must reach a unanimous verdict and if it can’t, the court must declare a mistrial and empanel a new jury to determine mercy.
Court: West Virginia Supreme Court Of Appeals, Judge: Bunn, Filed On: June 12, 2023, Case #: 21-0554, Categories: jury, murder, Sentencing
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the trial court improperly convicted defendant of second-degree murder and weapons charges because eyewitness testimony was properly admitted, and defendant failed to preserve arguments to limit jury instructions. However, sentences should run concurrently since the charges arose from the same crimes. Reversed in part.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: June 9, 2023, Case #: KA 18-02110, Categories: murder, Sentencing, jury Instructions
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of second-degree murder. Search warrants for cellular data and electronic devices were not overly broad since they could connect defendant to locations at which physical evidence had been tampered with and where the victim's body had been burned in a fire pit. Meanwhile, a prospective juror's statements that she might be preoccupied with work-related issues did not indicate her preoccupations would affect her ability to be fair and impartial. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: June 9, 2023, Case #: KA 18-00389, Categories: jury, murder, Search
J. Olson finds that the lower court improperly denied defendant’s post-sentence motion to review his sentencing in his murder trial. The trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing and determine whether or not a juror discussing the case with her father inserted outside influence into the outcome of defendant’s trial. Vacated.
Court: Pennsylvania Superior Court, Judge: Olson, Filed On: June 7, 2023, Case #: J-A22008-22, Categories: jury, murder, Sentencing
J. Hood finds that defendant was not entitled to provide the jury trying his attempted extreme indifference murder case with a definition of universal malice. "Universal malice" is not a technical term, as a reasonable person of common intelligence would know that, as it applies to a homicide, it means "a willingness to take life indiscriminately." Affirmed.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court, Judge: Hood, Filed On: June 5, 2023, Case #: 21SC564, Categories: murder, jury Instructions
J. Johnson reverses and remands for a new trial the murder and attempted murder convictions of a 19-year-old defendant sentenced to 56 years in state prison. The trial court erred by refusing to provide certain jury instructions requested by defendant, including the specific intent required for attempted murder. The defendant claims the murder victim was a good friend of his from the school swim team and he did not know a codefendant was armed for a planned drug rip-off. The codefendant was acquitted of all charges.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Johnson, Filed On: June 2, 2023, Case #: 210848, Categories: murder, Double Jeopardy, jury Instructions
J. Lipinsky finds that the trial court should have allowed the jury to hear defendant's instruction on the felony murder affirmative defense. He was not required to admit to the predicate robbery felony in order to assert the defense, which was supported by some credible evidence that he did not know a gun was present, did not intend to engage in a robbery and that he tried to disengage from the crime when he learned a gun was present. Unlike the affirmative defenses of entrapment or self-defense, the felony murder affirmative defense does not justify or excuse the predicate offense. Reversed in part.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Lipinsky, Filed On: June 1, 2023, Case #: 21CA0976, Categories: murder, Robbery, jury Instructions
J. LaGrua finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of murder and correctly denied defendant's motion for a new trial based on prosecutorial misconduct. Sufficient evidence was presented to support defendant's conviction, including evidence that defendant fatally shot the victim in front of multiple eyewitnesses. Defendant failed to show that his trial counsel's performance was deficient or that he was prejudiced by his counsel's failure to request a jury instruction on confession corroboration. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: LaGrua, Filed On: May 31, 2023, Case #: S23A0166, Categories: Ineffective Assistance, murder, jury Instructions
J. Soto finds a lower court ruled correctly in convicting defendant of murder and giving him a life sentence after he killed an escort at his home. Defendant argued that he “freaked out” after the victim raised her prices and threatened to call police and that there was not adequate evidence to support “the jury’s rejection of his sudden-passion claim,” but the jury was “free to reject” these arguments and did not commit a legal error by doing so. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Soto, Filed On: May 31, 2023, Case #: 08-22-00207-CR, Categories: Intent, jury, murder
J. Ellington finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of murder. Although the trial court's charge failed to correctly instruct the jury on the essential elements of felony murder and aggravated assault with intent to murder, defendant failed to show that the incorrect jury charge affected the trial outcome. There was compelling evidence in the record that defendant intended to kill the victim and that he participated in the crime. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: Ellington, Filed On: May 31, 2023, Case #: S23A0322, Categories: murder, jury Instructions