51 results for 'cat:"Murder" AND cat:"Robbery"'.
J. Peterson finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of murder, armed robbery, burglary and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. The trial court correctly denied defendant's motions for mistrial. The state's failure to timely disclose the inconclusive results of a test comparing another suspect's hair to hair recovered from a stocking cap did not significantly impact defendant's defense. Defendant failed to show that he was prejudiced by the state's failure to tell him that his first custodial interview was recorded. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: Peterson, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: S24A0399, Categories: Burglary, murder, robbery
J. Warren finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of murder, armed robbery and burglary. Sufficient evidence was presented to show that defendant was a party to the crimes. The trial court correctly instructed the jury and did not commit any error in admitting into evidence a short recording of a jail phone call between defendant and his mother. None of the statements made by defendant during the call implied that defendant wanted to negotiate a plea deal with the state. Although the jury was not aware that one witness had an incentive to testify against defendant, the testimony was mostly cumulative of other evidence and defendant failed to show that the witness's alleged deal with the state would have impacted the verdict. The trial court incorrectly convicted defendant of possession of a firearm during the commission of aggravated assault. That count should have merged into defendant's conviction for firearm-possession based on murder. Affirmed in part.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: Warren, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: S24A0011, Categories: Burglary, murder, robbery
J. Baker finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of capital murder. Defendant argues that errors in the abstract of the jury charge led to him being harmed, specifically the mention of "intentionality" in the course of determining whether someone has committed capital murder. While the abstract did contain errors, the rest of the abstract greatly outweighs any potential harm those errors could have had on defendant's case. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Baker, Filed On: April 25, 2024, Case #: 03-23-00044-CR, Categories: Jury, murder, robbery
J. Montgomery finds the lower court properly dismissed a defendant’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Defendant was convicted of first-degree murder during the perpetration of a robbery and facilitation of especially aggravated robbery, and received an effective life sentence. The habeas corpus court dismissed the matter because defendant’s petition failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Affirmed.
Court: Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge: Montgomery, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: W2023-01330-CCA-R3-HC, Categories: Habeas, murder, robbery
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. Worthen finds the trial court properly denied defendant's second motion for post-conviction DNA testing. Defendant was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to life in prison for the robbery and shooting death of a convenience store operator. Eyewitness testimony and DNA evidence link defendant to the scene of the crime during the appropriate timeframe. Defendant does not explain what newer testing techniques are available, what result he anticipates the testing would produce or how that result would cast doubt on the conviction. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Worthen , Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 12-23-00246-CR, Categories: Dna, murder, robbery
J. Vaidik finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for four counts of murder and one count of robbery. Police responded to a report of shootings to find a drug dealer and three associates shot multiple times, with the dealer's apartment having been ransacked. Surveillance footage shows a vehicle associated with defendant at the scene. A friend of the victims who left the apartment after defendant and his accomplices had arrived but before the shooting occurred also identified the defendant. Evidence from defendant's cell phone was properly admitted, with the search warrant supported by probable cause. Affirmed in part.
Court: Indiana Court Of Appeals, Judge: Vaidik , Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 23A-CR-898, Categories: Evidence, murder, robbery
J. Aarons finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of murder, robbery, and weapon possession after codefendants ripped off marijuana sellers and defendant shot one of the dealers following a car chase. Witnesses established that defendant brandished a gun upon taking the marijuana and shot the victim after approaching his vehicle. Defendant contends a robbery could not have occurred since "owning" marijuana was illegal in New York at the time, but this claim lacked merit. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Aarons, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: 112197, Categories: Evidence, murder, robbery
J. Wendlandt denies the defendant’s motion for a new trial, after he was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole after he and two others attempted to rob a victim, who fought back and then was shot and killed by the defendant. The court decided not to apply its abolition of felony-murder, as an independent theory of liability for murder in the first and second degrees, retroactively to the defendant’s case or any other case. This does not violate his equal protection rights because, even though the theory was abolished for disproportionately adversely affecting racial minorities, its impact cannot be “traced to a discriminatory purpose.” Affirmed.
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Court, Judge: Wendlandt, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: SJC-12405, Categories: murder, robbery, Equal Protection
J. Perret finds that defendant was improperly sentenced for armed robbery and attempted first degree murder and given "illegally lenient sentences" for those convictions. The evidence does not show that defendant "is so exceptional as to justify a departure from the minimum mandated sentences" under the habitual offender statute. Vacated in part.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Perret, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: KA-23-460, Categories: murder, robbery, Sentencing
J. Kyzar finds that defendant was properly convicted of second degree murder and given a life sentence stemming from her role in the shooting death of a victim found along a riverbank in a park. There was sufficient evidence of defendant's involvement in the robbery, kidnapping and murder of the victim. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Kyzar, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: KA-23-350, Categories: Evidence, murder, robbery
J. Miller holds that the trial court must revisit defendant's petition for resentencing on a felony murder conviction. The state failed to show that he would be convicted of felony murder in light of changes to the felony murder law. The evidence does not support a finding that he either intended to kill or acted with reckless indifference for human life when his accomplice stabbed and killed their robbery victim. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Miller, Filed On: January 30, 2024, Case #: A162356, Categories: murder, robbery, Sentencing
J. Pena finds that it was error for the resentencing court to redesignate defendant's attempted murder of a police officer convictions as assaults with a firearm on a police officer, which are lesser included offenses of the attempted murder charges. Resentencing due to changes to the felony murder statute is limited to the robbery counts for which defendant was charged and convicted. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Pena, Filed On: January 18, 2024, Case #: F085131, Categories: murder, robbery, Sentencing
J. Dorrian finds that while the victim gave defendant permission to use his car prior to the shooting, defendant's robbery conviction was supported by sufficient evidence. The victim clearly could not give consent to allow defendant to drive the car after he was shot and killed. Meanwhile, eyewitness testimony from the victim's stepdaughter that she saw defendant shoot the victim at point-blank range shortly after the two exited the vehicle was sufficient to support the aggravated murder conviction. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Dorrian, Filed On: December 21, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-4671, Categories: Evidence, murder, robbery
[Consolidated.] J. Pinson finds that the trial court properly convicted defendants of murder, armed robbery and other offenses. Sufficient evidence was presented to support defendants' convictions, including evidence that a witness identified one defendant as the shooter. The trial court did not commit any error in instructing the jury on conspiracy over the objection of one defendant because there was ample evidence supporting the jury charge. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: Pinson, Filed On: December 19, 2023, Case #: S23A0881, Categories: murder, robbery, Conspiracy
[Consolidated.] J. LaGrua finds that the trial court properly convicted defendants of murder and other offenses. The trial court correctly denied one defendant's motion for a directed verdict as to charges for felony murder and conspiracy to commit robbery and burglary. The counts merged and it was reasonably foreseeable that the dangerous activities one defendant and his co-conspirators engaged in could lead to an encounter with police and that someone could be killed. Sufficient evidence was presented to support the other defendant's convictions. The trial court correctly denied the other defendant's motion to transfer venue and for a directed verdict as to the conspiracy to commit robbery and burglary count. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: LaGrua, Filed On: December 19, 2023, Case #: S23A0857, Categories: murder, robbery
J. McMillian finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of murder, armed robbery and other offenses. The trial court correctly denied defendant's motions for mistrial. Defendant failed to move for mistrial based on a co-indictee's references to being previously incarcerated with defendant until the day after the co-indictee's testimony. Defendant also failed to timely move for a mistrial on the ground that the state failed to disclose evidence favorable to defendants. Defendant failed to show that his trial counsel's performance was deficient. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: McMillian, Filed On: December 19, 2023, Case #: S23A1097, Categories: murder, robbery
J. Baker finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for murder, aggravated residential burglary, a terroristic act and terroristic threatening based on sufficient evidence. The victim's minor children informed a neighbor their mother had been shot during a home invasion robbery. Investigators found the victim had been shot 10 times, along with damage to the home including bullet holes in the walls and floors of the children's bedroom. The children and another witness identified defendant in various photo lineups. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Baker , Filed On: December 14, 2023, Case #: CR-22-619, Categories: murder, robbery, Terrorism
J. Pennell finds that the lower court improperly convicted defendant of murder based on the robbery of a safe. Defendant was also convicted of the robbery of a ring, but that conviction was ruled separate from the murder conviction so as not to violate double jeopardy. While there was sufficient evidence of the ring robbery, there was insufficient evidence as to the robbery of the safe. Therefore, "insufficient evidence supports a jury verdict for felony murder predicated on robbery of the safe." Vacated.
Court: Washington Supreme Court, Judge: Pennell, Filed On: November 9, 2023, Case #: 101068-1, Categories: murder, robbery
J. Emfinger finds the lower court properly convicted defendant of capital murder, aggravated assault, possession of a firearm by a felon, and two counts of armed robbery for his role in shooting two men in a nightclub he robbed; one man was killed and the other severely injured. The lower court improperly convicted him on one count of armed robbery because there was no evidence presented that personal property was taken from the victim that was killed. Reversed in part.
Court: Mississippi Court Of Appeals, Judge: Emfinger, Filed On: October 31, 2023, Case #: 2021-KA-01161-COA, Categories: murder, robbery, Assault
J. Harrison finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for aggravated robbery and murder. Though defendant says that another person with whom he had spent the day drinking committed the robbery, evidence and inconsistencies in defendant’s story suggests that he was also involved in the crimes. A text message was found on defendant’s phone in which he stated that he was going to rob a house, and muddy shoeprints were found around and inside the home which matched shoes found in defendant’s closet. All evidence supports the convictions. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Harrison, Filed On: October 25, 2023, Case #: CR-23-14, Categories: Evidence, murder, robbery
[Consolidated.] J. Warren finds that the trial court properly convicted defendants of murder, participating in criminal street gang activity, armed robbery and other offenses. The trial court correctly rejected defendants' motions for directed verdicts of acquittal. Sufficient evidence was presented to support defendants' convictions, including evidence that defendants assisted co-defendants in carrying out the plan to kill the victim because the victim was believed to be a police informant. Evidence also showed that defendants were associated with the Gangster Disciples street gang and that they killed the victim in furtherance of the gang's interests. One defendant failed to show that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting evidence showing that he participated in another murder days after the victim's murder. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: Warren, Filed On: October 24, 2023, Case #: S23A0783, Categories: murder, robbery, Gangs
J. Beales finds the lower court properly convicted defendant of three counts of first-degree murder, three counts of abduction with the intent to extort money, three counts of child abuse or neglect, three counts of child endangerment or cruelty, one count of robbery, one count of conspiracy to commit robbery, and one count of conspiracy to commit abduction with the intent to extort money for his role in a scheme to rob a man of money and at least two kilograms of cocaine. During the execution of the plan, defendant and other members of his group moved three members of a family into separate rooms, restrained them, then slit their throats. After completion of the killings, the defendant and others departed the home leaving a 17-month-old toddler and a one-month-old baby unattended until a family member discovered them and the bodies days later. Evidence is sufficient to support defendant’s convictions. Affirmed.
Court: Virginia Court Of Appeals, Judge: Beales, Filed On: October 10, 2023, Case #: 0643-22-2, Categories: murder, robbery, Kidnapping
J. Beales finds the lower court properly convicted defendant of three counts of first-degree murder, three counts of abduction with the intent to extort money, three counts of child abuse or neglect, three counts of child endangerment or cruelty, one count of robbery, one count of conspiracy to commit robbery, and one count of conspiracy to commit abduction with the intent to extort money for his role in a scheme to rob a man of money and at least two kilograms of cocaine. During the execution of the plan, defendant and other members of his group moved three members of a family into separate rooms, restrained them, then slit their throats. After completion of the killings, the defendant and others departed the home, leaving a 17-month-old toddler and a one-month-old baby unattended until a family member discovered them and the bodies days later. Evidence is sufficient to support defendant’s convictions. Affirmed.
Court: Virginia Court Of Appeals, Judge: Beales, Filed On: October 10, 2023, Case #: 0676-22-2, Categories: murder, robbery, Kidnapping
J. Alpert agrees with the trial court’s decisions to use a police officer’s statements as evidence and to use coconspirator hearsay and text messages as evidence against a man convicted of felony murder, robbery and other charges. The officer told the court that when the man used the word “lick” in communication with coconspirators, the word referred to committing a robbery. The officer was not treated as an expert, but his experience in law enforcement, particularly his nine years in a robbery unit, was treated as reliable testimony in this case. Further, hearsay in this case was admissible because the information was directly relevant having come from coconspirators in the crimes. Finally, texts messages between the man and third parties are also admissible because they establish his preparation, motivation and intent to commit the crimes. Affirmed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Alpert, Filed On: September 27, 2023, Case #: C-08-CR-20-000179, Categories: Evidence, murder, robbery
J. Bendix finds that the trial court properly denied defendant's petition for resentencing on an attempted murder conviction because statutory changes were not applicable. However, his conviction for the murder of his robbery accomplice under the provocative act doctrine may have improperly been based on imputed malice stemming solely from his participation in the robbery and must be revisited for an evidentiary hearing. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Bendix, Filed On: September 27, 2023, Case #: B323940, Categories: murder, robbery, Sentencing
J. Ramirez holds that the trial court properly denied defendant's petition to vacate a murder conviction because of changes to the felony-murder rule, as he was the actual shooter. Although a determination of which of the robbers actually shot the store clerk was not litigated, defendant confessed that he shot the clerk because the clerk recognized him. That confession matched other evidence, so it was litigated for the purposes of collateral estoppel. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Ramirez, Filed On: September 26, 2023, Case #: E078627, Categories: murder, robbery