Douglas Percy. There is no shortage of decisions reversing convictions due to the erroneous admission of the defendant's prior criminal history, specifically prior convictions. In February of 1991, [Thompson and Percy] went to New Castle, Indiana, to meet a man by the name of Wesley Crandall. The bag Thompson carried contained several guns and Percy's bag contained marijuana and shell casings. The defense responded that the State was limited by Rule 404(b) to the least prejudicial way of proving access to the murder weapon and that Thompson could not be retried for the Crandall murder. In the next few weeks, Thompson used Percy's garage to grind the serial numbers off the weapons taken from Crandall's residence. When Featheringill was asked about the events in New Castle, the defense objected on hearsay grounds. If Percy's account is credited, he was essentially an accomplice or, at a minimum, a direct observer of Thompson's criminal acts. It is valid as a logical proposition only if one has an understanding of all the dynamics of the Crandall trial. Illinois state police recovered a nine-millimeter handgun from the vehicle that ballistics tests later determined was the weapon used to kill Hillis and Beeler. 1995) (evidence as to defendant's four prior, convictions for dealing in cocaine should not have been admitted in prosecution for cocaine possession), trans. The jury therefore knew from the outset that Thompson had been a killer and a thief in the past. However, the details of the killing, including the cause of death as being two gunshot wounds in the head, id. United States v. Burke, 948 F.2d 23 (1st Cir.1991) (bootstrapping testimony related to extrinsic acts is admissible but only to the extent it is relevant to a material fact). 534, 539, 166 N.E.2d 864, 866 (1960) (in prosecution for burglary, erroneous admission of defendant's alleged involvement in prior burglaries required new trial). Because the State alleged that Thompson stole the murder weapon from Crandall and subsequently used it to kill Hillis and Beeler, the theft of the gun was relevant to this trial. Lila Thompson (1967-1971), Percy Douglas (1984-1988), Shynese Sangster (2002-2006) Control profile. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. He had no conscience about rape, child molestation, or thrashing a dozen men in a prison fight. However, the details of the killing, including the cause of death "as being two gunshot wounds in the head," id. Rather, he chose to attack Percy's credibility. I don't think [Rule] 404 precludes the obtaining of the weapon, so the State will be allowed to introduce evidence of the obtaining of the weapon. In sum, the parties and the court concluded before trial that Thompson's access to the murder weapon was relevant to proving that he was the killer. In a hearing outside the presence of the jury, the State asserted that proof of the conviction was relevant to show identity and because Percy's credibility had been attacked. To be admissible under this Rule, Percy's motive to fabricate had to have arisen after the prior statement was made. He did not break 510, 130 pound Wesley Crandall's neck. Percy is much taller then any student at Doug's school. Please try again. 1991) ("bootstrapping" testimony related to extrinsic acts is admissible but only to the extent it is relevant to a material fact). Indeed, the State does not contend that these were signature crimes. The trial court began the voir dire, before any questioning had occurred, by reading both the charging information and the death penalty information to all prospective jurors. His job was to set up mobile kitchens as the troops pushed forward into France. BOEHM, Justice. Who does [the State] say was with Jerry Thompson on March 14th of 1991, at Hillis Auto Sales? Hardin v. State, 611 N.E.2d 123, 129 (Ind.1993). They met Mr. Crandall in his home in New Castle; they conducted their business, and when it came time to leave, they didn't leave. On cross-examination, the defense did not directly challenge Percy's account of what happened in New Castle. Sixty people were indicted in federal court for their roles in a conspiracy to bring heroin from Chicago and Atlanta and sell it throughout Greater Cleveland, law enforcement officials announced . It also placed Percy himself at each of these crime scenes. A friend of Percy's, Mike Featheringill, testified that Percy told him that [Percy] went over to this drug dealer's house, and they were going to purchase some marihuana, and Jerry shot the drug dealer with a shotgun, execution style.8 These witnesses actually added to Percy's account, rather than merely corroborating it, because Percy testified only that he assumed Thompson had shot Crandall in the head. Thompson and Percy each grabbed a large trash bag and drove back to Indianapolis. Mr. Thompson was ultimately convicted of the murder of Wesley Crandall in February of 1991. We need not address whether this error is a ground for reversal in the absence of any objection by the defense because the convictions must be set aside for the reasons explained in Parts II and III. The allegedly corroborative evidence here was irrelevant. The State responds that a portrayal of the Crandall murder was not prohibited by Rule 404(b) because it helped prove Thompson's identity as the killer. Jerry Thompson, his brothers David (Lisa) and Dan (Ana) Thompson, his nephews, Lucas . 1987) (in prosecution for unlawful gun possession, recorded conversation between a police informant and the defendant about sale of the gun was properly admitted, but it was error to admit subsequent exchange on the same tape concerning unrelated drug sale). In this review, we do not reweigh evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses. Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters. Jerry Thompson Thompson Profiles | Facebook Jerry is related to Virginia Ann Thompson . The State's contention that the extra details of the Crandall murder helped prove identity is unpersuasive. Percy did not see the location of the shot, but assumed that Thompson had shot Crandall in the head. That charge was eventually dismissed in exchange for Percy's testifying about the deaths of Hillis and Beeler. The State lauded Percy in its closing argument as the man who helped solve both the Indianapolis killings at issue here and Crandall's murder a month earlier: [I]n the process of telling the Police Department and other Law Enforcement authorities those things that he knew, [Percy] solved 3 murders. See, e.g., Heavrin v. State, 675 N.E.2d 1075, 1083 (Ind. Whether it was necessary to show that Thompson shot Crandall is a closer question, but we need not decide that point because the other material admitted clearly went beyond the pale and requires reversal. The jury's verdict reflects a decision to credit Percy's testimony that this, Court, as an appellate tribunal, would ordinarily not question. ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE, Joseph M. ClearyJeffrey A. Modisett Robert V. ClutterAttorney General of Indiana Indianapolis, Indiana Arthur Thaddeus Perry Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana, JERRY K. THOMPSON, ) ) Appellant (Defendant below ), ) ) v. ) 49S00-9507-DP-869 ) STATE OF INDIANA, ) ) Appellee (Plaintiff below ). The State's claim that any prejudice to Thompson was cured by a limiting instruction is unpersuasive. He contends that a drumbeat of prejudicial and irrelevant evidence related to Crandall's killing induced the jury to draw the "forbidden inference," at the core of Rule 404(b), that Thompson killed once, so must have done so again. Percy's testimony about the Crandall murder was thus introduced to prove an important element of the State's case -- that Thompson had access to the murder weapon before the killings at Hillis Auto Sales. 1983, trial court committed reversible error by informing jury sua sponte during voir dire of inmate's prior convictions for rape and sexual assault). Ct. App. C. The State's case in chief When Percy began to testify about the events surrounding the Crandall murder, the defense objected and renewed its contention that this evidence was irrelevant and inadmissible under Rule 404(b). First, this does not remove the stain of admitting the conviction into evidence in view of the instruction that the jury is to consider only evidence in reaching its verdict, and not the charging information. 1996) (reversing conviction due to erroneous admission of propensity evidence) (internal quotation marks omitted), suggesting that because Thompson killed and robbed Crandall, he must have killed and robbed Hillis and Beeler too. Indeed, the prohibition on use of prior misconduct to prove a criminal charge is "a basic tenet of criminal evidence law older than the republic itself . Two witnesses -- the forensic pathologist and Percy's friend Mike Featheringill -- testified to how Crandall died. That is not the end of the analysis, however. There is no shortage of decisions reversing convictions due to the erroneous admission of the defendant's prior criminal history, specifically prior convictions. The State's closing argument was replete with references to the Crandall murder, to the extent that an uninformed reader would assume that Thompson was being tried for the Crandall murder in this case. ), APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable John R. Barney Jr., Judge Cause NO. ; see generally Robert L. Miller Jr., Courtroom Handbook on Indiana Evidence 61 (1998 ed.). Indeed, by the time of closing argument, the State referred to the discrete killings as a circle of criminal conduct for which Thompson should be held responsible. See, e.g., Heavrin v. State, 675 N.E.2d 1075, 1083 (Ind.1996). Because the risk that the jury would draw the forbidden inference based on what happened in Henry County is undeniable, the probative value of the extra details of the Crandall murder was substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. And, he took Wesley Crandall's money that was there, and the marihuana. The proffered conviction here does not approach the probative value required to outweigh that prejudice under Rule 403. 5. The defense closed by cautioning the jury that "the State wants to try and 'bootstrap' the events of February 14th, 1991, into scaring you into convicting Jerry Thompson for the events of March 14th." DICKSON, SULLIVAN and SELBY, JJ., concur. Pay particular attention to Mr. Percy. The guards noticed a disturbance. There is enormous potential for prejudice in the guilt phase if the jury is permitted to know from the outset, in a murder case, that the defendant is a convicted killer. He didn't leave witnesses. United States v. Smith, 80 F.3d 1188, 1193 (7th Cir.1996) (internal quotation marks omitted). Jerry A Thompson, 80. 338, 367-68, 417 N.E.2d 889, 905-06 (1981); Evans v. State, 563 N.E.2d 1251, 1259 (Ind. . I don't think [Rule] 404 precludes the obtaining of the weapon, so the State will be allowed to introduce evidence of the obtaining of the weapon." You can explore additional available newsletters here. Even if all the evidence related to the Crandall murder and Thompson's trial in Henry County were relevant and of probative value here, this evidence would not clear the balancing hurdle of Evidence Rule 403. B. If the fact of conviction for a prior murder is presumptively prejudicial, the gruesome details of that offense may be even more damaging. The identity exception to the general prohibition on propensity evidence is crafted primarily for signature crimes with a common modus operandi. It is valid as a logical proposition only if one has an understanding of all the dynamics of the Crandall trial. He contends that a drumbeat of prejudicial and irrelevant evidence related to Crandall's killing induced the jury to draw the forbidden inference, at the core of Rule 404(b), that Thompson killed once, so must have done so again. After testifying as to the Indianapolis victims, he also testified that Crandall had died of a gunshot wound to the head. We first examine what went on in the trial court. In rebuttal, the State replied that the events surrounding the Crandall murder were relevant: The reason it's relevant is because it proves [Thompson's] identity. Jerry Don Thompson serves as President of Voyager Energy Services and Vice President of Granbury Thompson Group offering SandX and Super Loop Products. Join Facebook to connect with Jerry Thompson and others you may know. Indeed, the jury could have convicted Thompson on Percy's testimony alone. However, double jeopardy forbids a retrial-even where the defendant requests it as here-if the reviewing court concludes that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction. Thompson pointed the gun at Crandall, but it made a clicking sound and would not fire. Access to the murder weapon, particularly where the evidence is circumstantial as in this case, is such a permissible purpose. If the extraneous details, of the killing were inadmissible in Ostrowsky -- a case involving car theft -- the prejudice to Thompson in a second murder prosecution is an a fortiori case. . And, as Evans put it, if the aggravating circumstances are "prior unrelated crimes . Rule 404(b) is on the books because evidence of prior crimes is presumptively prejudicial. Thompson was charged and a jury convicted him on all counts. Unnecessary and inflammatory detail may require reversal. See, e.g., United States v. Currier, 821 F.2d 52 (1st Cir.1987) (in prosecution for unlawful gun possession, recorded conversation between a police informant and the defendant about sale of the gun was properly admitted, but it was error to admit subsequent exchange on the same tape concerning unrelated drug sale). Evidence is sufficient if the probative evidence and reasonable inferences drawn from the evidence could have allowed a reasonable trier of fact to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That's what identifies him with being associated with that gun. On February 14th, 1991, Wesley Crandall, Junior, was murdered in his home in New Castle. He claimed this was sufficiently proved by the undisputed evidence that the murder weapon was found when Percy and Thompson were stopped by Illinois state police three months after Hillis and Beeler were killed. Jerry Don Thompson (born November 21, 1942) is Regents Professor of History at Texas A&M International University in Laredo, Texas. AT THE TIME, THOMPSON WAS ON DIRECT APPEAL FROM HIS DEATH SENTENCE FOLLOWING A RETRIAL IN MARION COUNTY. The defense responded that the State was limited by Rule 404(b) to the "least prejudicial" way of proving access to the murder weapon and that Thompson could not be retried for the Crandall murder. Conviction there could have been based on forensic or other evidence wholly independent of Percy's testimony. The details of the prior murder were irrelevant. Ind.Code 35-50-2-9(b)(1) (Supp.1990). Percy did not assert his knowledge of that fact or whether Crandall died from the shot. The trial court denied Thompson's motion, ruling that the State could show how a weapon of the crime was obtained. Most seriously, the information, witness list, and verdict form from the Crandall murder trial were admitted into evidence. The fact of Thompson's conviction for murdering Crandall was wholly irrelevant to establishing his access to the murder weapon. The issue is whether evidence beyond that appropriate to establish access to the gun was admitted and, if so, whether it was harmless error. Despite Thompson's actions linking the separate events, the jury was impermissibly left with the reverberating clang of the Crandall murder ringing in its ears, United States v. Merriweather, 78 F.3d 1070, 1077 (6th Cir.1996) (reversing conviction due to erroneous admission of propensity evidence) (internal quotation marks omitted), suggesting that because Thompson killed and robbed Crandall, he must have killed and robbed Hillis and Beeler too. What particular pa. You're all set! They met Mr. Crandall in his home in New Castle; they conducted their business, and when it came time to leave, they didn't leave. Facebook gives people the power to share and makes the world more open and connected. They found the 41-year-old inmate on the floor with stab wounds. In any event, as explained in Part III infra, Featheringill's testimony was not relevant to the material fact of Thompson's access to the murder weapon and therefore should not have been admitted. The second best result is Jerry Lamar Thompson age 60s in Portland, OR in the Eliot neighborhood. United States v. Burke, 948 F.2d 23 (1st Cir. There are 10+ professionals named "Doug Percy", who use LinkedIn to exchange information, ideas, and opportunities. Champlain v. State, 681 N.E.2d 696, 702 (Ind. This occurred with the apparent assent of all counsel. Second, although we find no directly relevant precedent, we are not willing to bootstrap failure to object to one major error into harmlessness of others in a death penalty case. In this review, we do not reweigh evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses. One of the aggravating circumstances was Thompson's prior conviction of the murder of Wesley Crandall Jr., discussed in more detail below.4 Although it was proper to inform prospective jurors of the crimes charged, the trial court erred in advising the jury of the death penalty information before the sentencing phase. Percy did not see the location of the shot, but assumed that Thompson had shot Crandall in the head. However, the jury's apparent decision to believe Percy may have turned on the wrongly admitted evidence. D. Closing arguments The State lauded Percy in its closing argument as the man who helped solve both the Indianapolis killings at issue here and Crandall's murder a month earlier: [I]n the process of telling the Police Department and other Law Enforcement. I. Lannan v. State, 600 N.E.2d 1334 (Ind.1992). . The State's contention that the extra details of the Crandall murder helped prove identity is unpersuasive. 1991, and ballistics tests confirmed to be the weapon used to kill Hillis and Beeler. . To prove that Thompson was the perpetrator, the State presented evidence that he stole the murder weapon, a handgun, in the course of committing a different murder a month earlier. 1989) (testimony concerning prior robbery was admissible in murder trial because the defendant had stolen the same type of pistol used to kill the victim); United States v. Day, 591 F.2d 861 (D.C. Cir. . The State all but urged the jury to make the forbidden inference. He did not break 5'10, 130 pound Wesley Crandall's neck. The relevance and balancing issues are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Not every aggravator needs to be kept from the jury. Brewer also established that the jury is impermissibly tainted when the aggravating circumstance to be charged is either a prior murder conviction, a prior murder unrelated to the current offense, or a prior life sentence. Id. Most seriously, the information, witness list, and verdict form from the Crandall murder trial were admitted into evidence. The trial court denied Thompson's motion, ruling that the State could show "how a weapon of the crime was obtained. 1990) (citing Brewer). Because we conclude that the extensive evidence of the prior crime was inadmissible under Indiana Evidence Rules 402, 403, and 404(b), and denied Thompson a fair trial, we reverse the convictions and remand for a new trial. They are far from justifying irrelevant and highly prejudicial evidence that has no relation to that point or to any other material fact in dispute. Application of the Indiana Rules of Evidence The well established rationale behind Evidence Rule 404(b) is that the jury is precluded from making the "forbidden inference" that the defendant had a criminal propensity and therefore engaged in the charged conduct. The fact of Thompson's conviction for murdering Crandall was wholly irrelevant to establishing his access to the murder weapon. Thompson retrieved a pillow from another room, placed it over Crandall's head, and fired. They have also lived in Phippsburg, ME and Beverly, MA. Before the trial in this case, Thompson was tried and convicted in Henry County of murdering Crandall. Thompson v. State :: 1997 :: Supreme Court of Indiana Decisions Thompson argues that the trial court erred in admitting the testimony of Columbus, Indiana gun dealer Velma Brown. See Part I supra. Thompson's access to the gun was an important piece of circumstantial proof increasing the likelihood that he was the killer (or at least not excluding that possibility). Brewer noted that, as in habitual offender proceedings, the death penalty information must be pleaded on a separate page from the charging instrument to "shield [the defendant] from the hazard of having the knowledge of his prior criminal record prematurely imparted to the jury. Such evidence is highly prejudicial." 1993) (in prosecution for child molesting, "[t]estimony regarding the previous [child molesting] conviction and details of the previous molestation were obviously highly prejudicial") (citation and footnote omitted); United States v. Cox, 536 F.2d 65, 72 (5th Cir. Jerry Thompson Profiles | Facebook About; Contact; Login; Search. The fact of a shotgun wound could perhaps have been established by a police officer or otherwise without getting into whether it was fatal. That is not the end of the analysis, however. The State emphasized the details of Crandall's killing from the beginning. In March 1992, Percy approached Indianapolis police with what he claimed was information about Thompson's involvement in the killings. For example, in United States v. Ostrowsky, 501 F.2d 318 (7th Cir. Because the risk that the jury would draw the "forbidden inference" based on what happened in Henry County is undeniable, the probative value of the extra details of the Crandall murder was substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. 4. A. The convictions must be reversed because a fair trial is required for every defendant, regardless of his apparent guilt or the magnitude of the crimes he may have committed. Ostrowsky, 501 F.2d at 324. at 367, 417 N.E.2d at 906. As noted, the extraneous Crandall murder evidence was not admissible for this purpose. The jury also returned convictions for two counts of felony murder, Ind.Code 35-42-1-1(2) (Supp.1989), which were merged into the murder convictions. These authorities, e.g., Maldonado v. State, 265 Ind. See, e.g., Watson v. State, 540 N.E.2d 598 (Ind. Douglas E Percy from 10 Shuman Rd, Marblehead, MA 01945, age 61, Phone 534, 539, 166 N.E.2d 864, 866 (1960) (in prosecution for burglary, erroneous admission of defendant's alleged involvement in prior burglaries required new trial). Far more importantly what somebody has to lose. Larry Sells Tells Of The Most Dangerous Man He Has Ever Prosecuted In Select this result to view Douglas A Percy's phone number, address, and more. Our cases have long admonished that one crime cannot be proved in order to establish another distinct crime even though they be of the same kind. at 321, were unfairly prejudicial and required a new trial. Under these circumstances, the errors were not harmless.11 See Wickizer v. State, 626 N.E.2d 795, 800-01 (Ind.1993) (holding that improperly admitted evidence of prior acts was not harmless error where the State emphasized the disputed conduct in its opening and closing arguments); James v. State, 622 N.E.2d 1303, 1309-10 (Ind.Ct.App.1993) (erroneous admission of propensity evidence was not harmless due to prosecutor's steady drumbeat of references to the defendant's prior criminal record, especially in closing arguments).
Polish Peasant Union Hoi4 Tag,
Sutton United Academy Trials,
Articles D