The admissibility of the Crandall murder evidence was contested from the outset. The only similarity here between the Crandall murder and the Indianapolis killings was the use of firearms to kill the victims (and different guns were used in each crime). 1997). 2d 265 (1988). 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. 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). Thompson argues that the trial court erred in admitting the testimony of Columbus, Indiana gun dealer Velma Brown. Id. Ultimately this case turns on whether the jury's exposure to the Crandall incident exceeded permissible bounds. Douglas Percy Thompson Born: 3 . . . 2d 1028 (1964) (per curiam) (conviction reversed because five jurors had been present when the defendant's conviction of a similar charge was announced in open court before the trial); Scott v. Lawrence, 36 F.3d 871 (9th Cir. Facebook gives. Bowen v. State, 680 N.E.2d 536, 540 (Ind. Inexplicably, Featheringill was also permitted to relate Percy's account of an execution style shooting.10 The fact that Crandall was killed, and how that occurred, was potentially as prejudicial as any fact can be and had no bearing on whether Thompson stole the murder weapon from Crandall that day. As a result, the decision to admit evidence of Thompson's access to the gun, and the State's offer of corroborative evidence to support Percy's version of the events in New Castle, was within the trial court's discretion. Lannan, 600 N.E.2d at 1338. 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. 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. 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. The rules of evidence require courts to guard against exploitation of those details. Jerry Thompson is on Facebook. As the defense's opening statement put it: Who does [the State] say was with Mr. Thompson in New Castle? SHEPARD, C.J., concurs with separate opinion. After testifying as to the Indianapolis victims, he also testified that Crandall had died of a gunshot wound to the head. Cf. 2056, 23 L.Ed.2d 707 (1969). You can explore additional available newsletters here. Indeed, the State does not contend that these were signature crimes. Although Percy's account of the Crandall murder in its particulars was uncontradicted and largely unchallenged, the State offered further detailed evidence about those events. 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. In its opening argument, the State outlined the events surrounding the Hillis and Beeler murders, and then explained Percy's delayed decision to come forward to tell police what he knew about Thompson's involvement. The propensity evidence in this case crossed that line by a wide margin. 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. Id. BOEHM, Justice. doug percy jerry thompson. State prisoner stabbed to death | wthr.com 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." 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. ." 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 . [1] He is a prolific author of books on a variety of related topics, specializing in the American Civil War, the history of the Southwestern United States, and Texas history. However, Thompson conceded in his second motion that the State was "entitled to show that Thompson had access to or control over the weapon used to commit the murders of Hillis and Beeler." That conviction was affirmed on direct appeal. Percy did not assert his knowledge of that fact or whether Crandall died from the shot. The State's fallback position, advanced at oral argument in this Court, is that all evidence related to the Crandall murder was properly admitted because Percy's credibility was under attack. Percy Douglas Thompson Percy Douglas Thompson in Australia, Victoria Marriage Index, 1837-1942. Although Thompson conceded that he was a passenger in the car in which the murder weapon was found three months after the killings, Thompson never offered to stipulate that he had access to the murder weapon before the crimes, or to the specific fact that he stole the weapon from Crandall in February 1991. Cf. at 321, were unfairly prejudicial and required a new trial. Although the State conceded that Percy had some culpability in both crimes, Percy's role was distinguished from Thompson's: All of us know Doug Percy is not blameless in this, and at the very least, he assisted Jerry Thompson, after these horrible murders were committed. Such evidence is highly prejudicial. Loveless v. State, 240 Ind. Wooden v. State, 657 N.E.2d 109, 111 (Ind. 338, 367-68, 417 N.E.2d 889, 905-06 (1981); Evans v. State, 563 N.E.2d 1251, 1259 (Ind.1990) (citing Brewer). II. Lannan v. State, 600 N.E.2d 1334 (Ind.1992). Such evidence is highly prejudicial." Percy was the only witness conclusively placing Thompson at the scene. authorities those things that he knew, [Percy] solved 3 murders. 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. That is not the end of the analysis, however. These authorities, e.g., Maldonado v. State, 265 Ind. A. Douglas Percy. The State indicated its intent to offer evidence related to the Crandall murder to establish Thompson's identity, and that it might offer evidence of Thompson's previous felony convictions "possibly as rebuttal to any attacks on the credibility of witness Douglas Percy . One of the aggravating circumstances was Thompson's prior conviction of the murder of Wesley Crandall Jr., discussed in more detail below.See footnote 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. Wooden v. State, 657 N.E.2d 109, 111 (Ind.1995). In brief, Percy testified that he and Thompson went to Crandall's house that day to purchase marijuana and that Thompson assaulted and shot Crandall.See footnote 6 Thompson then stole several of Crandall's guns, one of which Percy identified at trial as the same handgun recovered in the car search in Illinois in June. 1986). 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. Percy's credibility was critical to the State's case. 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. 1976) (admission of a "rap sheet" detailing the defendant's criminal record, including prior convictions, was reversible error). 1990) (citing Brewer). . Specifically, prospective jurors were informed, verbatim, of the four aggravating circumstances the State had pleaded against Thompson in the death penalty information. Larry Sells Tells Of The Most Dangerous Man He Has Ever Prosecuted In His heart belonged to Santa Barbara, and he could not imagine living anywhere else in the world. The State's fallback position, advanced at oral argument in this Court, is that all evidence related to the Crandall murder was properly admitted because Percy's credibility was under attack. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. The Seventh Circuit held that the fact that the possessor had been killed was admissible to prove his lack of consent to the transfer of possession and, therefore, that the car had been stolen from him. cuando tu pareja te miente frases virginia rockhounding map doug percy jerry thompson. Pay particular attention to Mr. Percy. 1993). 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. In the end, an impermissible flood of damaging propensity evidence washed away Thompson's right to a fair trial. . The convictions and sentence are reversed. Douglas Percy. "See footnote 5 Brewer, 275 Ind. The relevance and balancing issues are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. However, the details of the killing, including the cause of death as being two gunshot wounds in the head, id. 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. Indiana Evidence Rule 404(b) provides that [e]vidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. The bag Thompson carried contained several guns and Percy's bag contained marijuana and shell casings. Pay particular attention to Mr. Percy [W]hen you retire to that Jury Room after evaluating the credibility of Mr. Percy, listening to all the Evidence, you're going to have doubts., 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). And, he took Wesley Crandall's money that was there, and the marihuana. 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. There is no doubt that Percy's credibility was critical to the State's case. The State's contention that the extra details of the Crandall murder helped prove identity is unpersuasive. 338, 367-68, 417 N.E.2d 889, 905-06 (1981); Evans v. State, 563 N.E.2d 1251, 1259 (Ind. Even oblique or apparently innocuous references to prior convictions are impermissible. This [is] the gun that came from there. 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.