51 results for 'cat:"Death Penalty" AND cat:"Murder"'.
J. McCool finds that the lower court properly convicted and sentenced defendant to death on multiple counts of capital murder. On appeal, defendant fails to show that his public-trial rights were violated. Also, he fails to show that a protection order was no longer in effect at the time of his wife’s death. Affirmed.
Court: Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge: McCool, Filed On: May 3, 2024, Case #: CR-21-0044, Categories: death Penalty, murder
J. Rowland finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for two counts of murder, sentencing him to death. Defendant became the prime suspect after a bank employee notified police of a series of transactions on the victim's debit card after her and her young son's deaths at their home. Defendant was identified by ATM photos and the testimony of the victim's sister, as well as testimony of multiple witnesses of preceding events. Even if the "knowingly creating a great risk of death" aggravator is invalid on certain counts, the remaining valid aggravating factor outweighs mitigating evidence and supports the sentence. The jury's finding the murder was especially heinous or cruel, as well as defendant's high risk for reoffending, is well supported. Affirmed.
Court: Oklahoma Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Rowland , Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: D-2019-542, Categories: death Penalty, murder, Sentencing
[Modified.] J. Streeter makes two minor wording changes with no change in judgment. One of nine claims defendant made in his kidnapping, robbery and murder case, which led to a death sentence, is entitled to a certificate of appealability. Reasonable jurists could find that the trial court improperly excused a juror who said she was "neutral" on the death penalty and said she did not want to make a life-or-death decision, but did not say she could not impose the death penalty. Also, the statutory 10-day deadline for granting or denying requests for certificates of appealability is directory, not mandatory. A substantial claim to relief is strong enough for a certificate to issue if jurists could debate whether the trial court erred. And a request must come with a record that is adequate for appellate review.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Streeter, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: A169146, Categories: death Penalty, Habeas, murder
J. King finds the lower court properly sentenced the defendant for using a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime. The defendant, convicted of the Violent crimes in aid of racketeering activity murders of 10 drug dealing competitors, argues their murder charges do not count as crimes of violence. Because the offenses involved physically committing a murder, and the murder was committed for a pecuniary purpose or for the purpose of gaining entrance to or maintaining or increasing position in the enterprise, they continue to count as crimes of violence. Affirmed.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: King, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: 22-5, Categories: death Penalty, Drug Offender, murder
J. King finds the lower court properly sentenced the defendant for using a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime. The defendant, convicted of the violent crimes in aid of racketeering activity murders of 10 drug dealing competitors, argues their murder charges do not count as crimes of violence. Because the offenses involved physically committing a murder, and the murder was committed for a pecuniary purpose or for the purpose of gaining entrance to or maintaining or increasing position in the enterprise, they continue to count as crimes of violence. Affirmed.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: King, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: 23-1, Categories: death Penalty, Drug Offender, murder
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. Deters finds the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to represent himself during his trial on two murder charges because the request was made nearly two years after the case had been placed on the court's docket and was clearly a delay tactic, given the trial was set to begin in a week and defendant claimed to need several more months to examine all the evidence. Furthermore, although the prosecutor's comments during closing arguments that defendant was unreliable and the manipulation of several individuals showed defendant's poor character were inappropriate, they did not deprive him of a fair trial. The death sentences are appropriate based, in part, on the brutal nature of the crimes, including multiple stab wounds to the victims and his dismemberment of the bodies. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Supreme Court, Judge: Deters, Filed On: March 14, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-902, Categories: death Penalty, murder, Self Representation
J. Streeter issues a certificate of appealability on one of nine claims defendant made in his kidnapping, robbery and murder case, which led to a death sentence. Reasonable jurists could find that the trial court improperly excused a juror who said she was "neutral" on the death penalty and said she did not want to make a life-or-death decsion, but did not say she could not impose the death penalty. Also, the statutory 10-day deadline for granting or denying requests for certficates of appealability is directory, not mandatory. A substantial claim to relief is strong enough for a certificate to issue if jurists could debate whether the trial court erred. And a request must come with a record that is adequate for appellate review.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Streeter, Filed On: March 11, 2024, Case #: A169146, Categories: death Penalty, Habeas, murder
J. Fischer upholds defendant's murder convictions for the shooting of two teenage girls and death sentences. The strained relationship between defendant and the victims, multiple threats made by defendant in the course of his relationship with his girlfriend - the victims' mother - and his decision to retrieve his gun from another room during their argument and fire 13 shots at the victims proved prior calculation and design and allowed the jury to convict him of aggravated murder. Meanwhile, the trial court properly admitted various autopsy and crime scene photos because they were used to illustrate various perspectives of the crime scene and injuries sustained by the victims. Although defendant was raised in a toxic, abusive environment and was diagnosed with some mental health issues, this mitigating evidence is far outweighed by the brutality of his crimes, which involved murdering two unarmed teenagers in front of their mother. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Supreme Court, Judge: Fischer, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-604, Categories: death Penalty, Evidence, murder
J. Bumatay finds that the district court properly denied a habeas corpus petition challenging defendant's Nevada conviction and death sentence for robbery, burglary, and the first-degree murder of his former girlfriend's father. Defendant claimed that the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act’s (AEDPA) deferential standard applies to his right-to-present-a-complete-defense claim. Defendant waived this issue by not presenting it to the district court. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Bumatay , Filed On: February 9, 2024, Case #: 16-99000, Categories: death Penalty, Habeas, murder
[Modified.] J. Miller modifies a citation with no change in judgment. The trial court must grant the Black defendant's request for an evidentiary hearing where the state must show race-neutral reasons for seeking the death penalty. He satisfied the two-prong test under the Racial Justice for All Act for a prima facie racial discrimination claim. For one prong, statistical evidence was sufficient to show that Riverside County has a historical pattern of racial inequality in seeking the death penalty. For the other prong, he provided evidence that nonminority defendants with prior records who were charged with multiple murders did not face the death penalty. So, the state must show why those similarly situated nonminority defendants did not face death. Vacated.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Miller, Filed On: February 9, 2024, Case #: E080924, Categories: death Penalty, murder, Equal Protection
J. Rothschild finds that defendant is not entitled to appeal the denial of his habeas petition for guilt phase relief under the Death Penalty Reform and Savings Act. He was granted habeas relief on his ineffective assistance claim and his death sentence was reduced to life without parole, so relief under the Act is no longer available to him. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Rothschild, Filed On: January 29, 2024, Case #: B325525, Categories: death Penalty, Habeas, murder
J. Miller orders the trial court to grant the Black defendant's request for an evidentiary hearing where the state must show race-neutral reasons for seeking the death penalty. He satisfied the two-prong test under the Racial Justice for All Act for a prima facie racial discrimination claim. For one prong, statistical evidence was sufficient to show that Riverside County has a historical pattern of racial inequality in seeking the death penalty. For the other prong, he provided evidence that nonminority defendants with prior records who were charged with multiple murders did not face the death penalty. So, the state must show why those similarly situated nonminority defendants did not face death. Vacated.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Miller, Filed On: January 25, 2024, Case #: E080924, Categories: death Penalty, murder, Equal Protection
J. Guerrero upholds the death sentence defendant received after pleading guilty to five counts of murder, along with life sentences for robbery, kidnapping and other counts. Evidence seized that was not specified in search warrants did not support a blanket suppression of all seized evidence since the warrants were sufficiently particular, were supported by probable cause, and allowed police to look in every corner of his residence for any trace evidence. Also, the jury was properly impaneled, evidence of corpse dismemberment was properly admitted, a misstatement by the state during closing argument did not merit reversal, and the death penalty is not cruel and unusual punishment. Affirmed.
Court: California Supreme Court, Judge: Guerrero, Filed On: January 22, 2024, Case #: S132256, Categories: death Penalty, murder
J. Durrant finds that the district court properly dismissed defendant's petition for post-conviction relief on a murder conviction for killing a fellow inmate. Evidence of improper communications between the judge and jurors during sentencing was newly discovered in 2012 but he did not file his petition until more than five years later in 2018. The failure of his initial post-conviction counsel to interview jurors does not excuse his failure to file his petition within one year of discovering the improper communications. Affirmed.
Court: Utah Supreme Court, Judge: Durrant, Filed On: December 21, 2023, Case #: 20180788, Categories: death Penalty, Jury, murder
J. Kellum finds that the lower court properly dismissed defendant's second petition for post-conviction relief following his conviction for capital murder and death sentence. The Rule 32 petition argued that "a second attempt to execute him" would represent cruel and unusual punishment, after the first attempt had allegedly failed due to complications with the IV lines. On appeal, he contends that the lower court erred by dismissing his petition without an evidentiary hearing, but the claim was not sufficiently pleaded and is also meritless. Affirmed.
Court: Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge: Kellum, Filed On: December 8, 2023, Case #: CR-2023-0594, Categories: death Penalty, murder, Cruel And Unusual Punishment
J. Brody finds that the trial court properly dismissed defendant's second successive petition for post-conviction relief on murder and arson convictions and a death sentence. His ineffective assistance claim is time-barred, and if the claim were allowed, his allegation that counsel should have used information about an affair between an investigator and a prosecutor to impeach the investigator was not material or prejudicial during the trial or at sentencing. Affirmed.
Court: Idaho Supreme Court, Judge: Brody, Filed On: December 5, 2023, Case #: 48677, Categories: death Penalty, murder
J. Agee finds the lower court improperly denied instead of dismissed the son's motion to reopen judgment on his death penalty sentence for ineffective counsel. The son and his father killed two police officers after engaging in an armed standoff with law enforcement stemming from the family's opposition to the government opening a road through their property. The son used his motion to reopen judgment due to ineffective counsel to circumvent the statutory limits on second or successive sentencing petitions. Vacated.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Agee, Filed On: November 27, 2023, Case #: 22-4, Categories: death Penalty, murder, Sentencing
J. Parraguirre finds the district court properly dismissed the death-row inmate’s complaint for declaratory relief challenging the legislature’s delegation of authority to the Department of Corrections as to the state’s method of execution. The relevant Nevada statute, together with the U.S. Constitution’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment, provides the department with suitable standards to determine the process by which a lethal injection is to be administered. Affirmed.
Court: Nevada Supreme Court, Judge: Parraguirre, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: 84081, Categories: Constitution, death Penalty, murder
J. Keller finds that upon reconsideration of defendant's habeas petition, which claimed false testimony related to his murder conviction, the court's previous denial stands. None of the newly presented material which alleges false testimony is convincing to likely change the outcome of his conviction.
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge: Keller, Filed On: September 27, 2023, Case #: WR-81,574-02, Categories: death Penalty, Habeas, murder
J. Wilson finds that the district court properly denied defendant's habeas petition for relief from his death sentence for murder. Defendant failed to show that he was prejudiced by his sentencing counsel's failure to present additional evidence about his mental state at the time of the crime or his bipolar disorder. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Wilson, Filed On: September 5, 2023, Case #: 22-10329, Categories: death Penalty, Habeas, murder