45 results for 'cat:"Murder" AND cat:"Due Process"'.
J. Kemp finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for capital murder and aggravated robbery, sentencing him to life plus 40 years in prison. A homeowner called her husband about a suspicious person at the house and the husband, on his way home, found a body in the street with multiple gunshot wounds. Police dash cam recorded defendant escaping in the victim's truck, and the victim's DNA was discovered on defendant's bloody pants when he was later arrested on multiple warrants. Defendant does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence. Certain evidence was properly admitted as cumulative of other evidence admitted at trial, and Ring camera photos of the truck were properly authenticated by detective testimony. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Kemp , Filed On: May 2, 2024, Case #: CR-23-574, Categories: Evidence, murder, due Process
J. Stephens finds that the lower court improperly reversed defendant's murder conviction. The lower court found that because the state wrongfully delayed bringing charges against defendant, the resulting loss of key witness testimony violated defendant's due process rights. While the state was negligent in its delay, there is no proof that that defendant suffered any prejudice from the loss of witness testimony. Reversed.
Court: Washington Supreme Court, Judge: Stephens, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 101502-0, Categories: murder, Speedy Trial, due Process
J. Castillo finds the trial court properly denied defendant's petition for resentencing on a second degree murder conviction. He claimed his due process rights were violated because he was not present at the proceeding where his petition was denied. But he was present at a previous hearing that functioned as the statutory resentencing hearing, when the parties were able to submit additional evidence and both parties agreed to submit the matter to the trial court. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Castillo, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: D081369, Categories: murder, Sentencing, due Process
J. Bell finds the trial court improperly convicted defendant for murder. The state admitted a recording of a phone call defendant made to his defense during pretrial detention in which he indicated his presence at the murder scene. Though the state argues defendant violated jail policy by using another inmate's telephone access code and waived his attorney-client privilege by making a three-way call, this is not sufficient to establish waiver of attorney-client privilege. The recording was improperly admitted. Reversed.
Court: Nevada Supreme Court, Judge: Bell , Filed On: March 7, 2024, Case #: 83672, Categories: Evidence, murder, due Process
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. Gibbons finds that while the government constructively amended defendant's indictment on a murder-for-hire charge when it filed a superseding indictment without required language about death resulting from the crime, defendant's due process rights were not violated. The prosecution repeatedly mentioned the language and its corresponding increase in potential punishments, while defendant made clear throughout the trial he was aware of the crimes with which he was charged. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Gibbons, Filed On: February 9, 2024, Case #: 22-1650, Categories: Criminal Procedure, murder, due Process
J. McMillian finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of murder and other offenses. The trial court correctly found that defendant failed to show he was prejudiced by the 19-year delay between his conviction and his direct appeal. Defendant has not shown that he probably would have prevailed on his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel if the delay had not resulted in the destruction of medical records showing that he had hand injuries at the time of the shootings. Defendant failed to show that the records could have supported a defense that he was not capable of firing the gun. The trial court also correctly denied defendant's motion for mistrial. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: McMillian, Filed On: February 6, 2024, Case #: S23A0810, Categories: murder, due Process
J. Lowy affirms defendant’s murder conviction for killing his wife. The defendant claims his daughter’s murder and the testimony of two latent print examiners should not have been allowed in evidence, that not enough was done to rule out the possibility of a different culprit, and that there wasn’t enough evidence to identify him as the culprit or establish his crimes’ premeditation, but he fails to substantiate any reversible error. Affirmed.
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Court, Judge: Lowy, Filed On: January 30, 2024, Case #: SJC-12420, Categories: Evidence, murder, due Process
J. Womack finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for murder based on sufficient evidence, including eyewitness testimony. The prosecution's mentioning that defendant went to the victim's home to recover his car, which was sold while he was in jail, implied a conviction for that offense. The prosecution was duly warned after the defense objected, and the statement does not support a mistrial. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Womack , Filed On: January 25, 2024, Case #: CR-23-1, Categories: Evidence, murder, due Process
J. Moore finds the trial court properly denied defendant's motion seeking postconviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. Defendant was convicted for attempted murder for the shooting of his deceased (by suicide) cousin's surviving girlfriend. Ever-changing postconviction testimony of another cousin and defendant's brother regarding the identity of the shooter is not credible. Evidence presented in the evidentiary hearing cannot overcome the strength of the victim’s trial testimony identifying defendant as the shooter. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Court Of Appeals, Judge: Moore , Filed On: January 23, 2024, Case #: A-22-869, Categories: Evidence, murder, due Process
J. Hudson finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for first-degree murder based on sufficient evidence. The fiancé of the victim testified that defendant, during an altercation at the victim's house, hit the victim with a baseball bat, and returned to the home several times while carrying a gun. Defendant shot the victim at a party soon after. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Hudson , Filed On: January 18, 2024, Case #: CR-22-615, Categories: Evidence, murder, due Process
J. Boggs finds that the trial court improperly granted defendant's motion to suppress a statement he made to police while in a hospital which preceded his indictment for murder and other offenses. The trial court incorrectly found that defendant's statement was involuntary under the due process clause based on defendant's medical condition and the medication he was receiving after he had organs removed to treat an abdominal gunshot wound. A defendant's medical condition by itself is not sufficient to render a statement involuntary. There is no evidence of any coercive circumstances surrounding defendant's physical condition that would have made the statement involuntary. Reversed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: Boggs, Filed On: January 17, 2024, Case #: S23A0842, Categories: murder, due Process
J. Gallagher finds the lower court properly denied defendant's successive motion for postconviction relief. There was no indication the police reports obtained after trial through a public records request were not disclosed to the state during trial or unavailable when defendant was initially tried or filed his first postconviction motion. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gallagher, Filed On: January 11, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-66, Categories: murder, due Process
J. Wood finds the trial court properly convicted defendant by guilty plea for first-degree murder based on sufficient evidence. The 77-year-old victim was found with a gunshot wound to the face during an officer's welfare check, and witnesses identified defendant running from the residence after they had heard a gunshot. Defendant's waiver of his right to counsel was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Wood , Filed On: January 10, 2024, Case #: CR-22-701, Categories: Evidence, murder, due Process
J. Hiland finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for first-degree murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment. After defendant learned his sister had accused his best friend of raping her, he shot the friend multiple times, killing him. Defendant admitted this to his wife and was arrested after requesting a lawyer through his squad leader in the Arkansas National Guard. The record has been examined for all objections, motions, and requests made by either party decided adversely to him and no prejudicial error is found. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Hiland , Filed On: December 7, 2023, Case #: CR-23-72, Categories: Evidence, murder, due Process
J. Wright finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for capital murder. Though defendant pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity to beating his 2-year-old daughter to death with a hammer, objecting to the admission of evidence of voluntary intoxication, his insanity plea allowed for the rebutting evidence of voluntary intoxication. That he admitted to officers after his arrest that he was aware of what he did and that he knew it was wrong also successfully rebuts the insanity defense. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Wright , Filed On: November 29, 2023, Case #: 09-21-00273-CR, Categories: Evidence, murder, due Process
J. Riley finds a lower court ruled correctly in convicting defendant of murder and other charges. Defendant argued the lower court abused its discretion, including by allegedly failing to give proper jury instructions on lesser offenses, but he fails to present a “cogent argument.” Affirmed.
Court: Indiana Court Of Appeals, Judge: Riley, Filed On: November 22, 2023, Case #: 23A-CR-518, Categories: murder, due Process
J. Smith finds the lower court properly denied defendant’s motion for post-conviction relief. Defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of first-degree murder and was sentenced to two consecutive terms of life imprisonment in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. Though defendant argues his guilty pleas were involuntary, the record shows otherwise, with the lower court conducting two plea colloquy proceedings to make sure defendant was aware of the consequences of his entering his pleas and that he was knowingly and voluntarily entering them. Affirmed.
Court: Mississippi Court Of Appeals, Judge: Smith, Filed On: November 14, 2023, Case #: 2022-CP-01186-COA , Categories: murder, Plea, due Process
J. Tow finds the trial court did not violate defendant's due process rights when it denied his motion to suppress statements made during a phone call with a detective. Although he was not read his Miranda rights, he was free to end the call at any time and expressed his willingness to return from Mexico to "pay for his acts" several times after admitting to the murder. Affirmed.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Tow, Filed On: November 9, 2023, Case #: 2023COA105, Categories: Miranda, murder, due Process
J. Wiseman finds the trial court improperly denied defendant’s petition for resentencing from his guilty plea conviction for attempted murder. The stated factual basis demonstrates that defendant stabbed the victim with the intent to kill during a gang-related fight, though defendant did not stipulate to the factual basis or otherwise admit the truth of the facts recited by the prosecution. The trial court improperly engaged in factfinding at the prima facie stage and erred in denying defendant’s petition without issuing an order to show cause and holding an evidentiary hearing. Reversed and remanded.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Wiseman, Filed On: October 25, 2023, Case #: C096982, Categories: murder, Sentencing, due Process
J. Goethals finds that the trial court improperly denied defendant's petition to be resentenced on three first degree murder convictions in light of changes to felony murder and implied malice murder law. He did not waive his due process right to be present at the evidentiary hearing and is entitled to be present at a new evidentiary hearing so he may offer testimony or evidence in response to the state's presentation. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Goethals, Filed On: October 17, 2023, Case #: G061191, Categories: murder, Sentencing, due Process
J. Goldman finds the trial court improperly convicted defendant for murder. According to various testimonies, a man who was “shooting up” in a truck outside defendant’s home was killed through actions of several people, including stabbing, kicking and stomping. The trial court did not consider defendant’s youth in assessing whether he formed the requisite mental state for conviction. Reversed and remanded.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Goldman, Filed On: October 13, 2023, Case #: A161815, Categories: Evidence, murder, due Process
J. Warren finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of murder and rape and correctly denied his motion for a new trial. Sufficient evidence was presented to support defendant's convictions. The trial court correctly denied defendant's motion for a continuance. Defendant's counsel was given time to interview witnesses during the proceedings and the trial court made the court's IT staff available to help with any technical issues. The trial court correctly denied defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment because the 11-year delay between the crimes and defendant's arrest was not deliberate or designed to give the state a tactical advantage. Defendant failed to show that his trial counsel performed deficiently. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: Warren, Filed On: October 11, 2023, Case #: S23A0678, Categories: murder, Sex Offender, due Process
J. Womack finds the trial court improperly convicted defendant for murder, imposing a life sentence. Upon briefing, the Arkansas Supreme Court issued an order for a status report regarding the relevance of a conventionally filed physical disk submitted as an exhibit even though it contained no files. The parties jointly advocated remanding the case. The Arkansas Supreme Court expresses its responsibility to scrutinize the record for errors in cases resulting in life-imprisonment sentences. Remanded to settle the record.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Womack, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: CR-23-1, Categories: murder, Sentencing, due Process
J. Hensal finds the trial court did not violate defendant's due process rights during his murder trial when it refused to correct allegedly incorrect information regarding shell casings found at the scene of the shooting. While the label on one of the shell casings may have been incorrect, the evidence submitted to the jury during its deliberations was accurate. Furthermore, the jury properly discounted defendant's self-defense theory and convicted him because he never denied he shot first and his characterization of his interaction with the victim as aggressive was insufficient to prove he was in fear for his life when he fired his gun. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Hensal, Filed On: September 27, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-3450, Categories: murder, Self Defense, due Process
Per curiam, The Nebraska Supreme Court overrules defendant's motion for rehearing on his first-degree murder conviction, also modifying the opinion. Under the analysis subheading: “Juror Misconduct,” the court substitutes the second paragraph with: [statute] provides that “[a] new trial, after a verdict of conviction, may be granted, on the application of the defendant” for “misconduct of the jury” “affecting materially his or her substantial rights.” The court has said that “misconduct of the jury” does not only mean a jury’s bad faith or malicious motive, but also a departure from a procedure for production of a valid verdict. Former opinion modified. Motion for rehearing overruled.
Court: Nebraska Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: September 15, 2023, Case #: S-22-169, Categories: Jury, murder, due Process
J. Robie finds that the trial court properly relied on the record, forgoing live testimony, before denying defendant's petition for resentencing for second degree murder. She received adequate due process during the resentencing hearing, which was held to the reasonable doubt standard. Her participation in the hearing was voluntary and the hearing did not determine guilt or carry a risk of additional punishment. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Robie, Filed On: August 31, 2023, Case #: C093672, Categories: murder, Sentencing, due Process