2516, 165 L.Ed. at 33536. When Robinson attempted to elicit this testimony from Stapleton, the district judge sustained the State's hearsay objection. This is not surprising because the Kansas act largely mirrors the federal provisions, and therefore wiretap applications are subject to both the state and federal requirements. First, Robinson highlights a time stamp discrepancy between State's Exhibit 4 and State's Exhibit 5. During her time in Kansas, she shopped at A. On February 25, 2000, Robinson sent Trouten an e-mail message requesting login and password information for all of her e-mail accounts. Instead, after summarizing the relevant evidence and arguments, the prosecutor asked the jury to hold Robinson accountable for his actions by finding him guilty. 1002. denied 537 U.S. 834 (2002), overruled on other grounds by Kansas v. Marsh, 548 U.S. 163, 126 S.Ct. Even if the trash bags were in the curtilage, the defendant must show that he had a reasonable expectation of privacy in them. Redding, 540 F.Supp.2d at 1187; see Fisher, 283 Kan. at 29091. She was never seen again, and her body was never found. She told Taylor that she would care for the elderly father of a man named John and accompany them while they traveled domestically and abroad. He reviewed correctional records, information about the offenses of conviction, the presentence reports, and Robinson's criminal history and educational and medical records. In October 1997, Robinson had his insurance agent write a 2year auto policy on Lewicka's vehicle, explaining she was an employee. 257 Kan. at 101920. The parties had passed Juror 340 without challenge. In discussing these elements, Morrison said, Finally, concealment, the barrels hidden away or isolated. The defense moved for a mistrial on the penalty phase proceeding only. Were the Challenged E-mails Authenticated Properly? Robinson now contends the failure to define the terms was erroneous. I would be in that barrel.. 381, 387, 418 N.W.2d 472 (1988) (premeditation can be founded on circumstantial evidence of organized planning and conduct prior to or after killing); see also State v. Kettler, 299 Kan. 448, 467, 325 P.3d 1075 (2014) (defendant's conduct before and after crime is relevant factor in deciding whether evidence gives rise to inference of premeditation). There, defendant was charged with sex crimes against an 8yearold girl. Wiretap applicants satisfy the necessity requirement by supplying a detailed overview of the investigation to date, concrete reasons why a wiretap was necessary, and explanations of how a range of traditional investigative techniques were proving, or were expected to prove, unlikely to succeed or too dangerous. According to a Radford.edu timeline on his life, he was named an Eagle Scout and attended a seminary. 60460(a). See Longoria, 301 Kan. at 512; Carr, 300 Kan. at 84. The amendment to K.S.A. This evidence was more than sufficient to prove Robinson took Trouten by deception; specifically, making false representations of employment and/or travel opportunities. 213439(a)(6) based on the killing of the same victims are multiplicitous. Robinson recognizes the primary shortcoming of his argument, that the instructions given by the trial judge were based on the language of the statute providing for the penalty phase hearing, which provides: If, by unanimous vote, the jury finds beyond a reasonable doubt that one or more of the aggravating circumstances enumerated in K.S.A. We found no abuse of discretion in the ruling. I'll leave you with that thought.. K.S.A. However, this language merely tracks the venue change statute itself, which compels the court to transfer venue where prejudice against defendant is so great that he or she cannot obtain a fair and impartial trial in that county. (Emphasis added.) Law enforcement officers also found numerous personal items that family members identified as Trouten's property, including her jewelry boxes, jewelry, collectible items, nursing textbooks, and a journal with the name Suzette inside. Cox testified the apartment was mostly vacant, but there were some boxes containing clothing and household items. In fact, defense counsel fought vigorously to exclude Shields' testimony for good reasonthese facts were detrimental to his mitigation case. First, Robinson highlights Judge Anderson's decision to exclude certain testimony from Suzette Trouten's former landlord, John Stapleton. I misspoke. Defense counsel attempted to cut off Juror 14 at this point, but the following exchange continued: VENIREPERSON 14: But, I'd be willing to look at, you know, other. Law enforcement also seized e-mails confirming that Trouten had given her login and password information to Robinson, including the information to access the Hotmail account used to send State's Exhibit 20. Here, the general language describing the ineffectiveness of search warrants was adequately supported by the averments contained in the four corners of the application and supporting affidavit. The prosecutor asked Glines why she wanted Robinson to stop calling her, and she explained: He was wanting me to come back here and live with him, work for him and totally abandon, so to speakor never speak to any family again. Robinson again highlights minor, technical variances, such as the location of caret symbols on one of the e-mails, as evidence of possible alteration but does not specifically controvert Taylor's testimony or the additional circumstances corroborating the authenticity of the messages. On May 22, 2000, Neufeld asked Robinson to return her sex toys, but he did not comply. He also believes prosecutor Morrison's comments during closing argument were improper if, in fact, KDOC prohibited Internet access to prisoners. A majority of these disqualified panelists, 167 of 259 (64 percent), were excused for cause based on preconceived opinions of the case, firm death penalty opinions (both for and against), or both. The appellate court standard of review for materiality is de novo. They also found a list of e-mail addresses and passwords, including slavedancer@hotmail.com, written on a sheet of legal paper, along with e-mails confirming Robinson's registration of the slavedancer address on several e-mail servers. Robinsons other known or suspected victims are Izabela Lewicka, Suzette Trouten, Beverly Bonner, Sheila Faith, and Faiths 15-year-old daughter Debbie. Additionally, where a defendant claims the denial of continuance interfered with his or her ability to present a defense, we review the question de novo. Defense counsel objected to the prosecutor's use of the term recommendation to describe the jury's sentencing decision, arguing it violated Caldwell. Robinsons arrest affected her the most because she viewed Robinson as a role model or idol. Jackson does not alter our conclusion. If not sentenced to death, the defendant will peacefully spend the rest of his life in prison. In addition, whatever prejudicial impact the comment may have created was mitigated by the district judge's instruction to jurors to disregard the remark altogether. Accordingly, we hold that these comments fell within the wide latitude afforded prosecutors in arguing the evidence. See State v. Novotny, 297 Kan. 1174, 1190, 307 P.3d 1278 (2013) (even assuming prosecutor's comment on defendant's demeanor was misconduct, isolated nature of remarks did not rise to the level of being gross or flagrant). Ideally, the instruction should have employed the term shall in discussing the both the life verdict and the death verdict, consistent with K.S .A. While many of John Robinsons family members described him at trial as loving and actively involved with the family, his adopted niece, Heather Tiffany Robinson, described him quite differently. The blood spots were roughly circular and less than 1 millimeter in diameter. John Robinson and Heather Tiffany Robinson/John Robinson's mugshot, John Robinson was a serial killer who maintained a family life, even while luring women to their deaths under the online alter-ego, Slave Master.. Contrary to the majority's declaration, the murder of Trouten was unnecessary to complete the elements of capital murder. Juror 14 confirmed he would consider mitigation evidence and weigh it against aggravating circumstances when questioned by the State, and he confirmed that he would consider a defendant's background specifically in response to defense questioning. In the back of the locker, officers saw three barrels. In closing argument, Robinson's counsel highlighted evidence, including the weight of the barrels housing the bodies and the unidentified fingerprints found on the plastic sheeting inside his Raymore, Missouri, storage locker and on the roll of duct tape stained with Lewicka's blood, as proof of others' involvement. Accordingly, federal decisions interpreting 18 U.S.C. However, we have made clear that this wide latitude is not limitless, and prosecutors may not comment on facts beyond the evidence. All but two members of the jury characterized their exposure to pretrial publicity as minimal, passing, or light; and several members said they saw coverage when the story first broke 2 years earlier and their recollection of the reported facts had diminished over time. Barbier v. Connolly, 113 U.S. 27, 31, 5 S.Ct. Furthermore, the State presented overwhelming evidence that Robinson carried out a substantial portion of the common scheme and course of conduct common to all six murders within Johnson County, where he lived and conducted business. After Robinson's objection, the prosecutor moved on to other issues at the district judge's urging and made no further reference to the subject. On April 4, officers found an invoice for a package Robinson sent to Glines in Californiathe woman who mailed letters postmarked from San Jose, California, at Robinson's request. See State v. Ninci, 262 Kan. 21, 48, 936 P.2d 1364 (1997); see also McKinney, 272 Kan. at 346 (prosecutor free to draw reasonable inferences provided that the remarks do not indirectly draw an adverse inference regarding the defendant's failure to testify). at 2769 (Breyer, J., dissenting). See, e.g., Robinson v. Polk, 438 F.3d 350, 36364 (4th Cir.2006) (state court's finding that jury's reading of Bible during sentencing deliberations in capital proceeding did not violate Sixth Amendment is neither contrary to nor unreasonable application of clearly established federal law); Lenz v. Washington, 444 F.3d 295, 31012 (4th Cir.2006) (following Robinson ); United States v. Rodriguez, 667 F.Supp.2d 218, 222 (D.Mass.2009) (There is no proscription on jurors reading the Bible before or after deliberations, or having a personal Bible in their possession.), aff'd 675 F.3d 48, 5961 (1st Cir.2012); cf. In the penalty phase, the State alleged the existence of one aggravating circumstance: That the defendant knowingly or purposely killed more than one person. The State asked the jury to consider all the guilt phase evidence presented during its case-in-chief relevant to this aggravator in deciding the sentence. The reservation was later extended for an additional week. 222401a(5). In 1984, he investigated a consumer complaint filed by the owners of Back Care Systems, International (Back Care), alleging Robinson defrauded Back Care through a bogus invoicing scheme through his company, Equi-plus. In Zant, the Eleventh Circuit held that the trial court erred in excluding prospective jurors where their death penalty views did not prevent them from imposing a death sentence under all conceivable circumstances. The record supports Judge Anderson's use of a juror numbering system under the two-part Brown balancing test, and we find no error. denied 437 F.3d 854 (9th Cir.2006). In 1998, Robinson told his publishing broker, Karen Scott, he had hired his adopted daughter, Lewicka, as a graphic designer. Instead he shifted the questioning to death penalty topics. K.S.A. Locklear appears to be of questionable authority even in Washington, and we find it unpersuasive here. For example, Robinson cites State v. Harris, 284 Kan. 560, 162 P.3d 28 (2007), where we discussed the common scheme or course of conduct requirement in analyzing the unit of prosecution for multiplicity purposes under K.S.A. Robinson offers no support for his claim that the prosecutor lacked a good-faith basis for her questioning, and even if he did, the expert's testimony on direct implied that he had not researched KDOC policy specifically, providing the prosecutors with a good-faith basis for the inquiry on cross-examination. Likewise, to the extent Robinson's challenge requires the court to interpret the statutory requirements of the Kansas Offender Registration Act, the issue presents a question of law subject to de novo review. She had interest in BDS&M and responded to personal ads, eventually meeting a man named John who promised to take her on a cruise and put Debbie in private school. Ingram v. State, 779 So.2d 1225, 1276 (Ala.Crim.App.1999) (trial court's reference to jury's capital sentencing verdict as a recommendation did not violate Caldwell ), aff'd sub nom. 1610, 75 L.Ed.2d 610 (1983). We determined that the statutory aggravator required a direct relationship between the great risk of death thrust upon the second victim and the homicide of the first victim. Robinson believes the trial court should have granted his motion for mistrial after witness Loretta Mattingly failed to testify in accordance with the prosecutor's proffer. The statute does not impose upon the government an exhaustion requirement but rather requires the government to establish that it first made a reasonable good faith effort to utilize other available normal and less intrusive investigative techniques before resorting to a wiretap. Robinson called Donald and Helen and told them a baby was available immediately. 222503 and 222505, as well as K.S.A. When asked to elaborate, Juror 316 said he felt that, regardless of the facts, there is an attorney waiting to take any case. 214624(e) unconstitutional. But common sense would dictate that, where a person sentenced to death is two or three times more likely to find his [or her] sentence overturned or commuted than to be executed, and has a good chance of dying from natural causes before any execution (or exoneration) can take place, the deterrent effect of a death penalty statute would be de minimis. She lived near her mother in the Monroe, Michigan, area. Also, the juror in Hensley was still struggling with the sentencing decision when he conferred with the pastor. We reversed, unable to declare that the lost opportunity to present evidence in mitigation of punishment was harmless in this case. 299 Kan. at 262. "Usually when I found out about [his affairs], it was over. The expert said his mother physically abused him, and blamed him for the death of his brother. The statute requires two or more acts that are requisite to the commission of the crime. Likewise, the wiretap statute limits a judge's ability to issue extraterritorial orders authorizing electronic interception of communications. In my view, this is a blatant example of ex post facto jurisprudence. In the end, we find the prosecutor made three isolated improper remarks during a jury selection process and guilt phase trial that continued for several weeks. As such, we find the instruction is unlike the situation in SmithParker and does not fly too close to the sun of directing a verdict for the State. 301 Kan. at 164. It's the ultimate concealment.. Where defendants allege the deprivation of rights under the Constitution, our court reviews such challenges de novo. Robinson's claim does not warrant relief under this standard. K.S.A. 2. Heather Robinson is now searching for her mothers remains. The number of jurors ultimately seated who had to set aside their earlier opinions was half of that who would have had to do so in Irvin; and none of them expressed community outrage. After Trouten's disappearance, her mother and father each received a handwritten letter from their daughter describing her supposed departure on a trip of a lifetime. See, e.g., State v. Tague, 296 Kan. 993, 1005, 298 P.3d 273 (2013) (burden is on party asserting error to establish trial judge abused discretion in limiting cross-examination). His daughter, Christy, viewed him as a role model and was hit hard by the arrest. WATCH Sole Survivor The 20/20 Event Tomorrow night at 9|8c on @ABC. 596, 187 L.Ed.2d 519 (2013). Morrison's comments on the content of the letter to Elledge did little, if anything, to bolster this evidence. Appointed counsel also had the benefit of the preparation Thomas and the DPDU had done over the course of nearly 2 years. See Caldwell v. Mississippi, 472 U.S. 320, 32829, 105 S.Ct. Robinson's attempt to revive the issue is wholly unpersuasive. Robinson also contends that the prosecutor committed misconduct by making comments that undermined his substantial rights. Judge Anderson also allowed the defense to utilize case-specific questioning during the third phase of jury selection, general voir dire. Morrison testified that Judge McClain said something to the effect that he knew the defendant as a, quote, con man or, quote, shyster, but characterized his comments as very brief and benign. In the rental application, Robinson identified himself and Lewicka as the prospective occupants. Lewicka occupied the Edgebrook Apartment, and Robinson paid the rent. Robinson requested that the trial judge include the following definitions of common scheme and course of conduct for the jury: A common scheme exists between multiple acts if such acts are closely connected in time, place, occasion, and the nature of the activity. The counts were identical in charging capital murder under K.S.A. In light of the foregoing, we deem the issue to be abandoned or otherwise no longer of statewide importance, and it is hereby dismissed. Each instruction informed the jury that, as one of the elements of the offense, the State had to prove the killing of Trouten or Lewicka, along with the killings of Bonner, Sheila Faith, Debbie Faith, and Stasi, were multiple acts or transactions constituting parts of a common scheme or a course of conduct.. at 2762 (Breyer, J., dissenting). The defense did not express any design or plan to introduce the subject deliberately during the guilt phase. As such, the comment exceeded the wide latitude afforded prosecutors in discussing the evidence. See United States v. Bowling, 619 F.3d 1175, 1186 (10th Cir.2010). In Kansas v. Marsh, 548 U.S. 163, 17879, 126 S.Ct. 464, 882 P.2d 624 (1994). However, that procedure existed as a method of removing potentially biased jurors for cause. 272 Kan. at 995. Juror 271, in contrast, consistently said he would consider mitigating circumstances, and when put to the test, he was willing to impose a life sentence in lieu of the death penalty. 223410(2)(i) provides that a prospective juror may be removed for cause where [h]is [or her] state of mind with reference to the case or any of the parties is such that the court determines there is doubt that he [or she] can act impartially and without prejudice to the substantial rights of any party.. The fact that we apply a heightened reliability standard in death penalty appeals does not necessarily bar application of this doctrine. Did Judge Anderson err in allowing the medical examiner's testimony regarding defensive wounds? 10 is that the State's burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt applies to both object clauses of the sentencethat aggravators exist and that aggravators outweigh mitigating circumstances. The State's evidence demonstrated Robinson killed both victims to steal their Social Security benefit payments. Lenexa Police Detective Michael Bussell drove by Robinson's residence 50 to 60 times from March to June 2000, exploring the location, developing strategies for collecting Robinson's trash, and coordinating trash pulls on collection days. Stettler was engaged to evaluate law enforcement's DNA testing procedures and advise the defense on the need for independent testing. 1. Sheriff v. Smith, 91 Nev. 729, 73132, 542 P.2d 440 (1975) (the phrase common plan or scheme interpreted to mean a single plan or scheme contemplating two or more offenses before the plan has been completed, did not violate due process); State v. Perez, 124 Ohio St.3d 122, 156 233, 920 N.E.2d 104 (2009) (rejecting course-of-conduct specification as unconstitutionally vague); Corwin v. State, 870 S.W.2d 23, 2829 (Tex.Crim.App.1993) (same scheme or course of conduct in capital murder statute not unconstitutionally vague; fact that marginal cases may make it difficult to determine whether offense committed not grounds to find statute unconstitutionally vague); Ross, 174 P.3d at 63334 (incident to one act, scheme, course of conduct, or criminal episode not unconstitutionally vague on due process grounds); State v. Pirtle, 127 Wash.2d 628, 662, 904 P.2d 245 (1995) (common scheme or plan is not unconstitutionally vague because jury instructions and verdict forms could be understood by an average person). Both Nerad and Lewis made clear that they could not render qualified and reliable opinions on the subjects absent further investigation. Robinson's former paramour, Aleisa Cox, testified that Robinson had her draft similar letters to her family members before they were supposedly scheduled to leave on a trip to Europea trip that ultimately fell through. At the outset of trial, during opening statements, the prosecutor told jurors that the evidence would demonstrate that Robinson employed a common scheme or course of conduct that included elaborate scams to exploit victims financially or sexually, kill them, and conceal their deaths. According to the court records, Robinsons youngest daughter, Christy, had a daughter and younger son. When the application of a statute is challenged on constitutional grounds, this court exercises an unlimited, de novo standard of review. Investigators saw a reddish-brown stain on the roll of duct tape, and Booth's subsequent testing confirmed the genetic profile produced a match to Lewicka's DNA. 10, which provides: The State has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there are one or more aggravating circumstances and that they outweigh any mitigating circumstances believed to exist. The instruction was based on the recommended instruction in PIK Crim.3d 56.00E and mirrored the language of the applicable statute, K.S.A. After the parties completed voir dire of each panel, the district judge ruled on challenges for cause. As defendant's expert, Dillehay, predicted, the process proved to be a highly effective tool for combating the impact of potentially prejudicial pretrial publicityone that yielded a qualified and impartial jury. Robinson's common scheme and course of conduct also included the financial exploitation of Beverly Bonner and, later, the use of deceit to conceal her murder. 213439(a)(6) was the murder of Trouten because she was killed after the enactment of capital murder skews the plain statutory language. I begin with the statutory definition of the precise crime for which the defendant was purportedly charged, convicted, and sentenced to death. State v. Nelson, 296 Kan. 692, 694, 294 P.3d 323 (2013) ( Judicial discretion is abused if judicial action is based on an error of fact, i.e., if substantial competent evidence does not support a factual finding on which a prerequisite conclusion of law or the exercise of discretion is based.). Absent an examined explanation from a defendant, it is difficult to know why a defendant would show or not show a certain behavior or emotion during his or her trial. 222401a). denied 520 U.S. 1253 (1997); United States v. McCullah, 76 F.3d 1087, 111314 (10th Cir.1996) (Morgan requires questioning during voir dire regarding whether jurors would automatically impose the death penalty and does not require specific questioning regarding mitigating factors), cert. State v. Longoria, 301 Kan. 489, 506, 343 P.3d 1128 (2015). Neufeld filed a police report, and law enforcement found Neufeld's sex toys several days later during the search of Robinson's Olathe storage locker. 12d 429 (2006). The concern for juror privacy was well founded. The payments are so far behind. 1134, 94 L.Ed.2d 326 (1987). She believed the address on the envelope was written by Trouten, but the return address was not. See Adams v. State, 2005 WY 94, 2226, 117 P.3d 1210 (Wyo.2005) (admission of edited printouts of chat room messages did not violate best evidence rule; computer printouts subject only to proof of authenticity). 222616(1). Judge Anderson agreed the comments were troubling but did not believe they were going to be a factor with the other panel members. Such a comment was not improper. Defendant argued the district court's refusal to grant a continuance denied him a defense at trial because without the video recording, he was unable to impeach law enforcement testimony regarding the interview. Robinson relies on Spain to argue that a course of conduct cannot include acts that are remote from one another in time, distance, and nature. Again, Robinson's argument is flawed. 222401a(5), consistent with the context and history giving rise to the 1994 amendment creating this subsection, LPD and OPPD officers had territorial jurisdiction to execute the search warrants in Olathe. 213106(6) is not applicable here. Robinson's failure to do so with Juror 147 undermines his claim of error on appeal. Robinson said Stasi thanked him for the assistance and said she had made other arrangements. Juror misconduct is a broad label which has been used to describe communications with jurors from outsiders, witnesses, bailiffs, or judges; and actions by jurors in the unauthorized viewing of premises, or reading of newspaper articles. State v. Fenton, 228 Kan. 658, 664, 620 P.2d 813 (1980). Did the State's evidence establish a common scheme or course of conduct? The Supreme Court rejected the very premise of Robinson's argument in Williams, 553 U.S. 285, where it reviewed a due process vagueness challenge to a statute criminalizing the pandering or solicitation of child pornography. Moreover, the prosecutor immediately clarified that he had not intended for his remarks to be construed as a statement on the presumption of innocence. 529 (2012); but see State v. Finley, 273 Kan. 237, 24445, 42 P.3d 723 (2002) (prosecutor's comments asking the jury not to let the defendant get away with the crime is in most instances permissible comment). Booth testified that this genetic profile occurs in only 1 in 6 billion people. The sixth factor, challenges exercised, weighed in favor of denying a venue change.
Double Homicide Oklahoma City,
Kiel James Patrick Politics,
Carla Moran Entity Today,
Articles N