Taylor confirmed the exhibit was a true and accurate copy of the message she received on her Hotmail account. The trial judge had the benefit of the Kleypas opinion at trial and included the following paragraph in the mitigating circumstances instruction, Instruction No. After the prosecutor explained the burden of proof, Juror 39 confirmed she would acquit Robinson if the State failed to meet its burden. Robinson fails to demonstrate actual prejudice. Accordingly, we hold that these comments fell within the wide latitude afforded prosecutors in arguing the evidence. Contrary to Robinson's premise that there would have been no death penalty at the time of his trial, his jury would actually have been instructed to impose death if his mitigators did not outweigh aggravators, and the State would have had an easier bar to clear. L.1970, ch. Each party may challenge any prospective juror for cause. K.S .A. In light of the totality of Juror 184's responses, we hold Judge Anderson's ruling to be fairly supported by the record. See K.S.A. Before her proffer to the district judge, Remington had testified that she sent an e-mail message to the eruditemaster address, received a response, and began communicating regularly with a man she came to know as James Turner, one of Robinson's known aliases. Neither party, in fact, called Ray or introduced his documents at trial. Robinson shared stories of his BDS & M liaisons with Carlos Ibarra, a maintenance employee at Santa Barbara Estates, and showed him nude photographs of a girlfriend depicted in BDS & M poses. After the instruction, the prosecutor commented, Thank you Judge. As set forth above, we review a district judge's denial of a challenge for cause for abuse of discretion. 213439(a)(6). granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded sub nom. Judge Anderson's authentication findings are supported by substantial competent evidence. State v. Fisher, 283 Kan. 272, 28283, 154 P.3d 455 (2007). 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. The amendment was a legislative response to Sodders designed to allow law enforcement officers of any jurisdiction within Johnson County or Sedgwick County to exercise their powers as law enforcement officers in any area within the respective county when executing a search warrant. Vrabel, 301 Kan. at 807; see State v. Mendez, 275 Kan. 412, 419, 66 P.3d 811 (2003) (1994 legislative amendment clearly authorize[s] city police officers in Johnson County to execute search warrants countywide). Glines was a former employee of Nancy Robinson, who maintained a long-distance relationship with Robinson by telephone and e-mail after she moved to California in 1997. Prosecutors charged Robinson, a Cicero native and former Eagle Scout, with five murders dating back to 1994, then began investigating other women who had disappeared in the area. On redirect, Mattingly clarified she had never received any complaints related to unit E2, but when the prosecutor asked about unit F10, Mattingly said: There was a problem with one of the units behind [F10] of a mattress that had gotten damaged, and I did walk by and see Mr. Robinson cleaning out F10. 20301a requires judges of the district court to exercise their powers within the territorial boundaries of their judicial districts. Law enforcement officers also recovered a pillow and pillowcase from inside the barrel that matched the pattern of Lewicka's bedsheets, which Robinson had since given to his paramour, Barbara Sandre. In fact, the rulings are all the more defensible here because, unlike Carr, Robinson's venue expert, Dillehay, opined that enhanced voir dire could effectively inoculate the effects of extensive pretrial publicity. However, Cunningham believed Robinson's use of deceit inside prison was motivated primarily by his desire to secure an earlier release, and Robinson would have no such opportunity with his crimes of conviction. In the living room area, Guzman found a box with an EZ Set label on it and a box with a Big Boy label on it that contained glassware, oil lamps, figurines, and other collectable items. During the rebuttal portion of penalty phase closing argument, the prosecutor challenged Robinson's mitigation case and emphasized the significance of the multiple murder aggravating circumstance. 106,469, 2012 WL 1658933, at *12 (Kan.App.2012) (unpublished opinion) (reversing and remanding for evidentiary hearing where trial court failed to make findings of fact on the record or in the journal entry to support conclusion that crime was sexually motivated), rev. Following the guilt phase trial, a separate sentencing proceeding was held pursuant to K.S.A. Robinson argues this testimony implied he made the request in hopes of luring a woman from Mexico and then murdering her. Robinson was looking for a white woman in her teens or early 20s, who had a newborn child, was struggling or disadvantaged, and had no family support or ties. See Carr, 300 Kan. at 16364. "You said nothing about seeing your husband that morning," he thundered. In essence, the prosecutor made himself an eyewitness and an expert witness who was not subject to the rules of evidence or cross-examination. Things that tend to lessen guilt or excuse behaviors tend to be mitigation. We found no abuse of discretion in the ruling. Why would she leave her car there? Detective Booth, KCMO Lab, determined the genetic profile from the blood on the paper towel matched Trouten's DNA profile. Inherent in this wide latitude is the freedom to craft an argument that includes reasonable inferences based on the evidence. King, 288 Kan. at 351 (quoting State v. Pabst, 268 Kan. 501, 507, 996 P.2d 321 [2000] ). Kimmelman v. Morrison, 477 U.S. 365, 374, 106 S.Ct. We apply the same two-part standard when reviewing claims of prosecutorial misconduct based on a prosecutor's questioning of witnesses on cross-examination. 213439(a)(6) was the murder of Trouten in Count II and the murder of Lewicka in Count III. K.S.A. On March 24, 2000, an e-mail from Trouten's Hotmail account was sent to several members of Trouten's family, including her aunt, Chidester; her sister, Kim Padilla; her brother, Michael Trouten; and her father's girlfriend. During this time period, the Kansas City Star published 72 stories. The same holds true for the fleeting references to Robinson's companies using the Equi title. The Court of Appeals held that the district court abused its discretion but found the error harmless because defendant did not offer any evidence in support of the durational departure. More recently, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals reached the same holding in United States v. Freerksen, 457 Fed. See In re Estate of Farr, 274 Kan. 51, 68, 49 P.3d 415 (2002) ( It is the factfinder's function to determine the weight and credibility of the witnesses. 213102(4), which addressed the scope and application of the Kansas Criminal Code that was effective July 1, 1970. The phrases use words in combination, not isolated definitions in combination, and, consequently, in common usage are more precise than the sum of their parts. At the September 5 hearing, Robinson offered Nerad's affidavit under seal, which the district judge reviewed in camera over the State's objection. However, the State put on substantial evidence, independent of this letter, establishing the fact of Stasi's murder and Robinson's connection to it. We do not know the person whom we have read and heard about on TV.. Judge Anderson liberally excused panelists holding preconceived opinions, granting 92 of the 100 challenges defendant asserted on this basis. Now, he's living in some shack with some divorced woman and her little kid and he helps her kind of. In January 2006, he informed Illinois he was moving to Oklahoma, and he registered in that state the following month. 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. Brown later inspected the unit and found it to be mostly unkempt but noticed the two bedrooms had been cleaned meticulously. Defining Standard of Proof for Aggravating Circumstances. The first comment was made to Robinson's defense counsel in the Back Care case more than 15 years before Judge McClain issued the pen registers, wiretap orders, and search warrants in this case and before he was appointed to the bench. Robinson was a self-employed, but not entirely successful, entrepreneur. 1. 213439(a)(6). (Emphasis added.) However, Juror 229 confirmed her ability to set these views aside and reach a sentencing decision based on aggravating and mitigating circumstances. The prosecutor informed the district judge it had a witness who could substantiate the factual basis of the question, i.e., that during the course of their BDS & M relationship, Robinson brought his infant grandchild to their BDS & M liaisons on more than one occasion. There, the Tenth Circuit took the position that the statute requires applicants to describe all traditional investigatory techniques, including use of search warrants, with particularity. at 277071 (Breyer, J., dissenting). 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. Again, Judge Anderson addressed this issue specifically in denying the third motion for continuance, explaining that any delay the expert experienced did not prevent appointed counsel from continuing to work on other aspects of Robinson's defense. Considering the record and argument in its totality, the prosecutor was addressing law enforcement's inability to find Stasi's bodynot Robinson's failure to take the stand or to otherwise inform law enforcement of the body's locationas the ultimate concealment. Jurors would not have necessarily and naturally understood Morrison's remark as a comment on Robinson's postarrest silence, and, therefore, it was not improper. The couple moved to the Kansas City area in late 1963 or early 1964, according to an appeal filed in his case. Was the complaint jurisdictionally defective? There, defendant argued city police officers exceeded their authority by executing a search warrant beyond their territorial boundaries defined in K.S.A. 596, 187 L.Ed.2d 519 (2013). denied 133 S.Ct. 869, 71 L.Ed.2d 1 (1982) (The sentencer may determine the weight to be given relevant mitigating evidence.); United States v. Basham, 561 F .3d 302, 337 (4th Cir.2009) (neither the Constitution nor laws of the United States require a capital jury to give mitigating effect or weight to any particular evidence so long as they did not refuse to consider evidence altogether); United States v. Bernard, 299 F.3d 467, 485 (5th Cir.2002) (no constitutional requirement that capital jury give mitigating effect or weight to any particular evidence); Allen v. Buss, 558 F.3d 657, 667 (7th Cir.2009) (The rule of Eddings is that a sentencing court may not exclude relevant mitigating evidence. Also, by statutory definition, there is but one offense because the legislature defined the unit of prosecution as more than one murder tied together by or constituting parts of a common scheme or course of conduct, even if committed in discrete acts.
Pima County Restaurant Covid Restrictions,
Global Plasma Solutions Lawsuit,
What Chicago Police District Am I In,
Dupage County Board Members,
Kharma Medic Biography,
Articles N