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. Taylor's testimony, along with the distinctive characteristics and subject matter of these interrelated messages, provide substantial competent evidence supporting Judge Anderson's rulings on State's Exhibits 13 to 16. 6, 234 P.3d 761, cert. 60445 and 60455. 286, sec. Robinson's youngest daughter, Christy, had a daughter and younger son. 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. 214627(b) and K.S.A.2014 Supp. 2788 (2012). 60460(a). Robinson asked Ibarra to have his mother mail several letters from a resort when she returned to Mexico. For purposes of clarity, the challenge is divided into two subissues: (1) whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying a continuance to allow counsel additional time to prepare the guilt phase defense; and (2) whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying a continuance to allow counsel additional time to prepare the penalty phase defense. In his final remarks to the jury, the prosecutor said: Now is your opportunity to decide whether or not you want to hold the defendant accountable for his actions for all these years. Hamm found reddish-brown stains on wallboard in the kitchen that presumptively tested positive for blood. Under nearly identical facts, Kansas courts have found no reasonable expectation of privacy in trash set out for collection at the edge of defendant's property in close proximity to the curb, even if located within the curtilage. While Lockett proscribes State conduct that bars defendant's presentation of mitigation evidence, [i]t does not prohibit a capital sentencing jury from assessing the weight of mitigating evidence and find[ing] it wanting as a matter of fact[. His operations were interrupted when he was convicted of a nonperson felony and incarcerated at the Western Missouri Correctional Center in Cameron, Missouri. Relief is granted only in those rare cases where publicity created either a circus atmosphere in the court room or a lynch mob mentality such that it would be impossible to receive a fair trial. Goss v. Nelson, 439 F.3d 621, 628 (10th Cir.2006) (quoting Hale v. Gibson, 227 F.3d 1298, 1332 [10th Cir.2000] ). However, K.S.A. John Edward Robinson (born December 27, 1943) is a convicted serial killer, con man, embezzler, kidnapper, and forger who was found guilty in 2003 of three murders and received the death sentence for two of them. 213439(a)(6), Robinson completed the acts satisfying elements of the charged offenses only after enactment of the statute. at 2765 (Breyer, J., dissenting). On October 25, 2002, the defense rested. A short time later, the jury returned a verdict of death on both capital murder counts. 216619(b). Carr, 300 Kan. at 16. To understand the nuances of the challenge, a summary of the procedural facts and background is in order. The third factor weighed against a change of venue as more than 2 years had lapsed between the time the story first broke in June 2000, when media coverage was at its height, and Robinson's trial in October 2002, when coverage had dissipated. 214625(2) (defining purposeful killing of more than one person as statutory aggravating circumstance). Generally, the failure to lodge a contemporaneous objection to the admission of evidence forecloses subsequent challenge on appeal. He was close with his family and their four children, and maintained a close relationship with his family members. 213439. Brown later conducted a check-out inspection of Lewicka's apartment and noticed she had left behind a fish tank, microwave, and table. [Norman]: For some reason she had moved out of this house and my other sister, Michelle, and I had to clean it up and we found correspondence to where she was into the kinky sex. Juror 149 agreed his questionnaire responses suggested he would lean toward death upon conviction, but he explained that he answered the questionnaire without knowledge of the statutory weighing equation or the role of mitigation in the sentencing decision. Robinson used computers and e-mail extensively and also utilized a cell phone and pager. "Usually when I found out about [his affairs], it was over. However, both of these correctional officials told Cunningham that Robinson fraudulently altered documents containing their signatures and used them to bolster his position before the parole board. The few courts that have addressed similar challenges have rejected the notion that due process compels the court to permit voir dire on the subject. Improper Designation of Convictions as Sexually Motivated. Richmond v. Polk, 375 F.3d 309, 32931 (4th Cir.2004) (Morgan, 504 U.S. at 72930, does not require trial court to allow defendant an opportunity to ask prospective jurors if they would still consider mitigating factors and impose a life sentence once informed of his prior conviction for first-degree murder. 4. at 18. He cites to our hard 40 precedent, State v. Brady, 261 Kan. 109, 929 P.2d 132 (1996), and State v. Spain, 263 Kan. 708, 953 P.2d 1004 (1998), in support of his argument. He met Lisa Stasi and her baby at a battered womens shelter in Kansas City, the timeline says. Even if erroneous in some way, instructions do not result in reversible error if they properly and fairly state the law as applied to the facts of the case and could not reasonably have misled the jury. This explanation adequately protected Robinson's due process rights. 1698 (2015). Rundle, a forensic chemist with the JOCO Lab, confirmed that nine hammers, two picks, and one chisel were seized for further forensic examination during the Linn County search. To the extent Robinson's arguments compel us to construe K.S.A. Robinson was convicted of capital murder on Counts II and III of the Fourth Amended Complaint. Did scope of voir dire rulings conceal mitigation impairment? I can say it's consistent though. Later that same day, Robinson filed his second motion for continuance, arguing that counsel Berrigan and O'Brien (appointed counsel) and Thomas (retained counsel) had an agreement as to the division of labor in the case, whereby retained counsel was handling the guilt phase and appointed counsel the penalty phase. Our case law does not support such a restrictive view of curative instructions. Robinson was sentenced to 246 months in prison for the aggravated kidnapping of Suzette Trouten, Count I; 7 months for the theft of Vicki Neufeld's property, Count IV; a life sentence with parole eligibility after 15 years for the first-degree premeditated murder of Lisa Stasi, Count V; and a pre-Guidelines sentence of 5 to 20 years or a post-Guidelines sentence of 13 months for the continuing offense of aggravated interference with parental custody, Count VI. Robinson has failed to demonstrate misconduct on this basis. host = new String(location.hostname); Did the Cumulative Effect of Errors Prejudice Robinson's Fair Trial Rights? See State v. Phillips, 295 Kan. 929, 94546, 287 P.3d 245 (2012) (Misstatement of law on completion of robbery was not reversible misconduct where jurors properly instructed, and remarks were isolated and devoid of ill will.). Robinson next challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his first-degree premeditated murder conviction for the killing of Lisa Stasi, as alleged in Count V. Robinson believes the evidence was insufficient because Stasi's body was never found and that the evidence does not tie him to her disappearance. 129, sec. The press also reported that defendant offered to plead guilty to avoid the death penalty. For 15 years he was just Uncle John, until she learned he was a serial The argument also begs the question whether the legislature intended to grant district judges the same extraterritorial authority for search warrants when it repealed K.S.A. It says: The States capital murder theory in Counts II and III was that Robinson killed Suzette Trouten and Izabela Lewicka, along with Sheila and Debbie Faith, Beverly Bonner and Lisa Stasi, and that these killings were all connected, constituting parts of a common scheme or course of conduct characterized by: (1) luring women with offers of employment, travel, and other benefits; (2) exploiting them financially, sexually, or otherwise; (3) killing them and disposing of their bodies in a similar manner; and (4) concealing the crimes through acts of deception and fraud. In Brady, we held that a trial court may impose a hard 40 sentence for a first-degree murder conviction if the defendant knowingly or purposefully killed more than one person in the course of the charged murder. The second time was in 1997 when she discovered he was having an affair with Izabela Lewicka, one of her husband's alleged victims, later found stuffed in a barrel on his rural Kansas property. We find the argument unavailing. Robinson was arrested that morning just before officers executed the search warrants. Counsel conceded at oral argument that defendant failed to make a proffer of the evidence that would have been introduced in the event of a continuance. State v. Kleypas, 272 Kan. 894, 991, 40 P.3d 139 (2001), cert. 4. Robinson believes such questioning was necessary because those who would assign little to no weight to specific types of mitigation were unqualified to serve. See also State v. Adams, 2 Kan.App.2d 135, 138, 576 P.2d 242 (unlike electronic eavesdropping statute, nothing in the search and seizure statutes limits power of district judges to issue warrants within territorial jurisdiction), rev. This method of reproduction appears to be the very type of process the Advisory Committee deemed acceptable for purposes of a duplicate original. At the outset, we take the unusual step of noting that our review of this mattergiven its size and complexityhas been assisted and facilitated by the diligence and professionalism of the trial judge, Judge Anderson, throughout the proceedings below. 222401a. The prosecutor's remarks were consistent with this precedent and in line with our definition of mitigating circumstances and controlling precedent defining the jury's role in assessing the weight of evidence offered in mitigation. After Tiffany's birth, Stasi's marriage crumbled and Carl reenlisted in the Navy. 2464, 91 L.Ed.2d 144 [1986] ). The argument is legally and factually suspect. 545 F.3d at 1243. Robinson's citation to State v. Locklear, 105 Wash.App. The defense team did not pursue independent testing until after the State completed and disclosed its DNA lab reports. Appointed counsel requested a 4month continuance. The only requirement Harris recognizes is that the murders be related to one another in some way. The common motive and short time between criminal acts merely happened to be the factors showing the relatedness of the murders in Harris. The reservation was later extended for an additional week. The State acknowledged the effect of this holding in its reply brief and admitted that consideration of the issue appears no longer necessary.. 3032 (3d ed.2007) (searches invalid on state law grounds do not invariably require suppression of evidence). 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. On October 4, the prosecution subpoenaed documents from Ray, and in response, correctional officials searched Ray's cell and found documents responsive to the subpoena. Moreover, nothing in Hennessee, Sodders, or Rowe suggests that there must be a genuine need for the requested assistance or that, if the request is reduced to writing, it must be drafted by the host jurisdiction. Powered by. Morgan recognized that a capital defendant must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to voir dire prospective jurors to effectively remove those who are not life-qualified. 504 U.S. at 73334. Prosecutor Welch argued jurors could reasonably infer from the proffered testimony that Robinson previously stored the barrels containing the victims' bodies in unit F10; they leaked, causing another renter to complain of an odor; and Robinson cleaned up the seepage and moved the barrels to unit E2, carefully wrapping them in plastic to avoid any further incident. Nevertheless, Stettler felt the reports might be useful and received copies the same day Stettler learned of the reports' existence. at 18. I do not read the subsection as including serial, but completely separate, killings. Our analysis above suggests otherwise. That says it all. At trial, Robinson objected only to the relevance of Ibarra's testimony, but K.S.A. See Zimmerman v. Board of Wabaunsee County Comm'rs, 289 Kan. 926, Syl. 213439(a)(6). The defense conceded that the testimony regarding Robinson's prior incarceration would have no effect on the juror's decision on guilt or innocence and again maintained that the failure to disclose it at this juncture could undermine their credibility during the penalty phase. Remington's testimony confirmed the redacted versions of the e-mails were true and accurate copies of the original messages on her computer, and Robinson does not suggest otherwise. In the first portion of the prosecutor's closing argument, he challenged this evidence and commented: I bet you Bev Bonner's family wouldn't agree with that. Here, LPD officers utilized their status as law enforcement officers to facilitate the cooperation and assistance of the private trash hauler, and they did so in furtherance of their duty to preserve the peace by building a case against Robinsona person they believed was involved in multiple murders and posed a continuing threat to the community. Additionally, as it relates to the denial of Robinson's motion for mistrial, we review this issue for an abuse of discretion. I thought it interesting that Mr. Cunningham didn't take two minutes to decide whether or not his bait of choice, the computer, will even be available for him in prison. Neufeld and Robinson discussed a potential BDS & M relationship, and he sent her a slave contract to review. 213439(a)(6). Were the Challenged E-mails Authenticated Properly? To do so, we first outline the relevant constitutional and statutory framework. Robinson was further ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $9,122.24. However, he said Stasi had recently come to his office to give him the motel key. She said she had noticed nothing out of the ordinary. at 33436 (copies of e-mails properly admitted where witness confirmed content matched his independent recollection of messages); Simon, 279 Ga.App. We settled this issue in State v. Scott, 286 Kan. 54, 6568, 183 P.3d 801 (2008), holding that two convictions arising out of a double homicide, one for capital murder based on the intentional and premeditated killing of more than one person and the other for premeditated first-degree murder, were improperly multiplicitous because, under K.S.A. However, where a search is conducted in violation of state statute only and the statute violated does not vest defendant with an individual right, does not contemplate exclusion of evidence as a remedy, and the violation results in no cognizable injury to defendant's substantial rights, such a remedy is unavailable. Kansas statute provides a vehicle for defendants to move for the suppression of evidence seized in violation of law. Robinson alleged the existence of several mitigating circumstances, including: 1. At 11:43 a.m., a long-distance call was placed from Robinson's Linn County trailer to Nancy Robinson's work phone. Jury selection is a task particularly within the province of the trial judge. Carr, 300 Kan. at 75 (quoting Ristaino v.. Ross, 424 U.S. 589, 59495, 96 S.Ct. However, in 1994, the legislature approved Senate Bill 742, which amended K.S.A. Because the last act necessary to trigger application of section 288.5 was an act of molestation that defendant committed after section 288.5's effective date, defendant's conviction was not a retroactive application of section 288.5 and therefore not a violation of the statutory prohibition against retroactive application of the Penal Code. 20 Cal.4th at 15758. Defendant later fell out of compliance and was arrested in Missouri in March 2007. He then got a job at a Chicago hospital. We reverse his capital murder conviction charged in Count III and his first-degree murder conviction charged in Count V as unconstitutionally multiplicitous with the capital murder conviction in Count II. See State v. Peoples, 227 Kan. 127, 133, 605 P.2d 135 (1980); People v. Lucas, 60 Cal.4th 153, 262, 177 Cal.Rptr.3d 378, 333 P.3d 587 (2014). The district judge's venue instruction failed to incorporate either statutory provision. On July 25, the trial court held an evidentiary hearing. In particular, Robinson believes these e-mails were unreliable because most exhibits had been forwarded to law enforcement and printed, rather than printed from the original recipient's computer. Essentially, Robinson argues the evidence supporting his theory of a truthful taking was more credible than the evidence supporting the State's theory of a taking by deception. Then we had Nancy Robinson, in some ways a tragic figure, and in some ways a sad figure, in some ways a pathetic figure, who takes the term stand by your man to a whole new level. Consequently, in its instructions, the trial court used the then-applicable language from Kleypas, requiring jurors to find that aggravating circumstances outweighed mitigating circumstances before imposing a sentence of death. He also noted his personal views would be subject to and limited by further instructions from the court. Likewise, the wiretap statute limits a judge's ability to issue extraterritorial orders authorizing electronic interception of communications. However, we have made clear that this wide latitude is not limitless, and prosecutors may not comment on facts beyond the evidence. Trouten traveled to Kansas City on two occasions in the fall of 1999, purportedly to interview for the position and find a place to live. . First, a magistrate involved in or who exercises law enforcement powers of the executive branch lacks neutrality and detachment. In contrast, Carolyn Trouten did not address the subject of Stapleton's testimony during her direct or cross-examination, and therefore, his testimony regarding Carolyn Trouten's declarations were not admissible under K .S.A. Defendant believes prospective jurors did not follow this admonishment because several panelists knew they would not be sequestered, a fact allegedly reported in the media, before the district judge made the announcement. Detective Frank Booth examined nine of the envelopes mailed to Larry Heath. On March 17, 2000, Robinson, posing as Tom, responded to Taylor's e-mail, describing himself as a very aggressive and hard working businessman and outlining his ground rules for a BDS & M relationship. 2954, 57 L.Ed.2d 973 (1978). Viewed together, the averments set forth in the application and affidavit supported the boilerplate language regarding the ineffectiveness of search warrants, thereby satisfying the necessity requirement. During general voir dire, Judge Anderson passed 65 of the 83 panelists, excusing 18 on grounds unrelated to pretrial publicity. When Sheilas husband died, she moved to Colorado with the girl and lived on Social Security. We hold the improper comment was not gross and flagrant. 213439(a)(6) necessitate further definition. The sixth factor, challenges exercised, weighed in favor of denying a venue change. On October 23, 2002, 13 days into trial, the State called Beverly Bonner's former husband, Dr. William Bonner. Thompson parked across the street from Martinez' house; and when Martinez and Wornkey arrived home, Thompson watched as Gleason approached Wornkey's Jeep and shot and killed Wornkey, wounding Martinez. 8, which states that [m]itigating circumstances are to be determined by each individual juror when deciding whether the State has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the death penalty should be imposed.. Defendant renewed his motion to change venue for a third time on October 9, 2002, explaining that a local radio personality had been giving away T-shirts outside the courthouse as a publicity stunt that morning. As to Juror 147's independent review of the Bible after deliberations had concluded for the day, courts have been reluctant to condemn such conduct. Soon after their appointment, Berrigan and O'Brien signed pleadings and motions, played a leading role at motions hearings and status conferences, and handled the examination of witnesses and argument at the January 2002 evidentiary hearing on the venue motion. Second, if misconduct is found, we have said the court must determine whether the improper comments prejudiced the jury and denied the defendant a fair trial. 630, 632, 538 S.E.2d 531 (2000) (no error in permitting officer to testify about her observations of the victim's wounds, to make an inference based on her training and on her observations of the wounds, and to opine that the victim's wounds were consistent with defensive ones, a conclusion that is beyond the ken of the average layman). First, Deputy Allen Hamm found a paper towel inside the kitchen sink with a reddish-brown stain that presumptively tested positive for blood. During the search of Robinson's Olathe storage unit, law enforcement officers seized several items relevant to the disappearances of Trouten, Lewicka, and Sheila and Debbie Faith. In Count II and III of the Fourth Amended Complaint, the State alleged that Robinson killed Suzette Trouten and Izabela Lewicka, respectively, as part of a common scheme or course of conduct that included the murders of Sheila Faith, Debbie Faith, Beverly Bonner, and Lisa Stasi. During general voir dire, neither Robinson nor the State challenged him. Given its collective experience discerning the plain language of statutes, what should jump out at the majority is that, first and foremost, the crime requires the State to prove the killing of more than one person. Pointedly, the legislature did not say that capital murder is the killing of one person after having previously killed one or more other persons. The application also incorporated by reference the averments set forth in Detective Brown's 31page supporting affidavit. The phrase does not limit the officers' jurisdiction to execute the warrants in the first instance. 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. The Zelinka rationale applies equally to Robinson's challenge. During the first portion of the State's closing argument, prosecutor Morrison claimed that Robinson was the common thread that ran through the similar characteristics of all the murders, including the bogus cover stories used to lure victims, the similar manner of killings, and the various efforts taken to conceal the deaths. Beverly Bonner was from Missouri, where she lived with her doctor husband and two sons. Before their scheduled departure, he directed Cox to write letters to her mother and daughter as though she had already arrived at each of these destinations, explaining there would not be time to write family during the trips. A course of conduct is a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose.. Here, the State alleged defendant took the victim and held her to inflict bodily injury. Judge Anderson's curative instruction and follow-up inquiry confirmed this panel nevertheless remained impartial. The two were extremely close and talked daily, even when Trouten was away. However, where a continuance is sought to retain new counsel, we consider the following five factors: (1) whether a continuance would inconvenience witnesses, the court, counsel, or the parties; (2) whether other continuances have been granted; (3) whether legitimate reasons exist for the delay; (4) whether the delay is the fault of the defendant; and (5) whether denial of a continuance would prejudice the defendant. Anthony, 257 Kan. at 1019. Detective Layman testified that law enforcement seized State's Exhibits 19NNRR and 19TTXX from inside a brown briefcase during the search of Robinson's storage locker in Olathe. Defendant argues the trial court improperly denied the challenge of Juror 271 because his responses showed he would shift the burden of proof from the State to the defense. Sheila said John was a wealthy executive who promised to take her on a cruise and put Debbie in private school. ] United States v. MelendezSantiago, 447 F.Supp.2d 144, 149 (D.P.R.2006), aff'd 644 F.3d 54 (1st Cir.2011). Remington ended her chat session with Trouten at 12:51 a.m. Remington never saw or spoke to Trouten again. Viewed in context, the comment was benign. Generally the best evidence rule requires the original writing be introduced when available. That was the whole reason John got her I know I will. 1610, 75 L.Ed.2d 610 (1983). Robinson argues Juror 147 committed misconduct by referring to the Bible at his hotel room after deliberations had concluded for the day, by bringing the Bible into the jury room at the outset of the second day of deliberations, and by making comments to other jurors about his interpretation of what the Bible says about the concept of mercy. There was some confusion when the State asked Juror 324 whether she would feel comfortable basing her decision on information from inside the courtroom, even if the State did a poor job presenting the case, and Juror 324 responded, No. 1003); Dirickson v. State, 104 Ark.App. I am requiring that that not be rolled into and brought up in the midst of a comparison between the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, because I do believe that the fashion which it's been raised during the last session Wednesday is tantamount to testing the jury to determine whether the specific, albeit very brief, factual allegations of the State would be weighed by the jury against the very generic mitigating circumstance without the factual comparison which we can't do because we are essentially getting into taking a vote on death penalty issues when we start doing that which would produce a juror that essentially would vote favorably for the defense and we are staking out the jury when we get to that point. For Robinson, the last act or event necessary to trigger application of K.S.A. 60460(a). In January 1997, Glines moved to California and her marriage later dissolved. The prosecutor's description of mitigating circumstances was consistent with Kansas law. At a continued hearing on July 27, 2001, Judge Anderson granted the DPDU's motion to withdraw and announced his intention to appoint capital defense qualified cocounsel to assist Thomas. That interpretation is clearly confirmed by language in Instruction No. Instead, [t]he Supreme Court has held that the test of juror impartiality is whether the juror can lay aside his impression or opinion and render a verdict based on the evidence presented in court. United States v. Wacker, 72 F.3d 1453, 1467 (10th Cir.1995) (quoting Irvin v. Dowd, 366 U.S. 717, 723, 81 S.Ct. If the defendant is not sentenced to death, a term of imprisonment is sufficient to defend and protect the people's safety. Verge, 272 Kan. 501, 50508, 34 P.3d 449 (2001) (no error in denying venue change where 96.7 percent of Dickinson County residents recalled the case; 71.7 percent had talked about the case; and 64 percent believed Verge was definitely or probably guilty); Higgenbotham, 271 Kan. at 59395 (no error in denial of venue change where 95.7 percent of Harvey County respondents recalled the case, 60.6 percent believed defendant was guilty, and 53 percent believed there was evidence of guilt); State v. Jackson, 262 Kan. 119, 12932, 936 P.2d 761 (1997) (finding no error in denial of venue change where 89.7 percent of respondents recalled the case and 60 percent had formed opinion of guilt); State v. Anthony, 257 Kan. 1003, 1007, 101415, 898 P.2d 1109 (1995) (affirming denial of motion to change venue where 97 percent of Salina residents had heard of case, 63.8 percent felt evidence of guilt was strong or overwhelming, and more than half unsure of impartiality); State v. Swafford, 257 Kan. 1023, 103536, 897 P.2d 1027 (1995) (companion case to Anthony ). Sheila's sister also believed she was interested in BDS & M. In spring 1994, Sheila told Guerrero she had met a man named John from Missouri. Robinson again cites Jackson, 107 Ohio St.3d 53, where the Ohio Supreme Court held that the trial judge should have informed jurors the victim was a 3yearold child, which would have elicited more informed responses to abstract questions regarding their impartiality.
Atlas Air Pilot Interview,
Factory Special Grande Cigars,
Why Do Trucker Hats Have A String,
Articles N
