Select this result to view Jerry Wayne Thompson's phone number, address, and more. A forensic pathologist who testified as to the causes of death of Hillis and Beeler was coincidentally the same doctor who performed Wesley Crandall's autopsy. His testimony was an essential element in the chain of evidence pointing to Thompson as the killer. The identity exception to the general prohibition on propensity evidence is crafted primarily for signature crimes with a common modus operandi. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google. At oral argument in this Court, the State contended that these details, which were partially corroborated by other witnesses as explained below, were admissible to show Percy's credibility. In this review, we do not reweigh evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses. 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 . Facebook gives people the power to share and makes the world more open and connected. 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 trial court ruled that the State would be allowed "to simply explain presence and then cut it off and let's get on." 492, 355 N.E.2d 843 (1976), however, stand for nothing more than what we have already concluded was permissible-a showing, with reasonable factual context, of access to the murder weapon. When this mandate is observed, the conviction will not be disturbed. But, the acts that [Thompson] committed up there, as they related to his case are proof of his guilt here; that's the whole reason you were able to hear it. 12. On February 14th, 1991, Wesley Crandall, Junior, was murdered in his home in New Castle. 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. Percy did not assert his knowledge of that fact or whether Crandall died from the shot. The issue is raised sua sponte to emphasize what Brewer and Evans made clear as to how prospective jurors should be instructed on aggravating circumstances in capital cases. 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. 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. In and of itself, no. Percy did not testify that Crandall was killed in his presence, only that he assumed Thompson shot him in the head. If so, the jury necessarily learns of the aggravating circumstance in the course of the guilt phase. 1995) (evidence as to defendant's four prior, convictions for dealing in cocaine should not have been admitted in prosecution for cocaine possession), trans. . United States v. York, 933 F.2d 1343, 1353-54 (7th Cir. It also placed Percy himself at each of these crime scenes. Although corroboration of collateral facts is sometimes permissible to show credibility, see, e.g., Ind. Thompson pointed the gun at Crandall, but it made a clicking sound and would not fire. at 368, 417 N.E.2d at 906. The fact of a shotgun wound could perhaps have been established by a police officer or otherwise without getting into whether it was fatal. A. Pretrial developments The admissibility of the Crandall murder evidence was contested from the outset. See, e.g., United States v. Currier, 821 F.2d 52 (1st Cir. 5. One thing was certain, by the time he reached manhood, Jerry Thompson was a savage killer. Percy's credibility was critical to the State's case. 492, 355 N.E.2d 843 (1976), however, stand for nothing more than what we have already concluded was permissible -- a showing, with reasonable factual context, of access to the murder weapon. 10. Brewer v. State, 275 Ind. When shown the handgun allegedly used to kill Hillis and Beeler, Percy testified that it "looks like the 'one' [Thompson] always carried," and that it resembled "one of the guns" that was taken from Crandall's house. Thompson and Percy each grabbed a large trash bag and drove back to Indianapolis. The State all but urged the jury to make the forbidden inference. Facebook gives people the power. His job was to set up mobile kitchens as the troops pushed forward into France. Stay up-to-date with how the law affects your life. We have little difficulty concluding that the fact and manner of Crandall's death, and Thompson's murder conviction, were highly prejudicial to Thompson. 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. 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 . Reading of Death Penalty Information in Voir Dire. 1 . Brewer distinguished between aggravating circumstances that are extraneous to the crime currently charged, such as a prior murder conviction, and an aggravating circumstance whose proof turns on the same evidence presented at the guilt phase. One of the defendants had killed the possessor of the car (who apparently had stolen the vehicle himself) before the car was driven from Indiana to Illinois. Ind.Code 35-42-1-1(1) (Supp.1989). 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." Moreover, the State emphasized the prior misconduct in its opening statement, during the case in chief, and again in its closing argument. Fox v. State, 497 N.E.2d 221, 224 (Ind.1986). 285, 102 L.Ed.2d 265 (1988). . According to Percy, on the day of the killings, he and Thompson went to Hillis Auto Sales where, without any forewarning, Thompson shot both victims and Thompson and Percy robbed them. Opening arguments The State emphasized the details of Crandall's killing from the beginning. The State all but urged the jury to make the forbidden inference. It also placed Percy himself at each of these crime scenes. See, e.g., Heavrin v. State, 675 N.E.2d 1075, 1083 (Ind.1996). In March 1992, Percy approached Indianapolis police with what he claimed was information about Thompson's involvement in the killings. Despite the fact that Percy's description of Crandall's killing was largely uncontradicted and unchallenged, the State pointed to the testimony of several witnesses -- the gun dealer who sold Crandall the murder weapon that Thompson eventually stole, the forensic pathologist who concluded that Crandall died of a gunshot wound to the head -- to corroborate Percy's account. The State's contention that the extra details of the Crandall murder helped prove identity is unpersuasive. The defense responded that the conviction was: (1) impermissible bolstering of Percy; (2) irrelevant to proving what happened at Hillis Auto Sales on the day of the murders; and (3) too prejudicial to be outweighed by any probative value. There is no shortage of decisions reversing convictions due to the erroneous admission of the defendant's prior criminal history, specifically prior convictions. Thompson's contention is meritless. Rule 404(b) is on the books because evidence of prior crimes is presumptively prejudicial. in the event that any such attack may open the door to the use of such evidence." On cross-examination, the defense did not directly challenge Percy's account of what happened in New Castle. All contact info about Douglas E Percy, 61 from Marblehead, Massachusetts - address, e-mail, phone, public records, etc at Inforver FOR FREE. Lockhart v. Nelson, 488 U.S. 33, 109 S.Ct. Resides in Mead, WA. 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. Pointing to Percy's own testimony that he was not always truthful, the defense urged that Percy was a liar who implicated Thompson to avoid prosecution for altering a vehicle identification number and possible culpability for his role in the three killings. at 367, 417 N.E.2d at 906. Douglas Percy Thompson Born: 3 . That charge was eventually dismissed in exchange for Percy's testifying about the deaths of Hillis and Beeler. What does Mr. Percy have to lose? A. In February of 1991, [Thompson and Percy] went to New Castle, Indiana, to meet a man by the name of Wesley Crandall. Percy did not see the location of the shot, but assumed that Thompson had shot Crandall in the head. The State again argued that Percy's decision to come forward led to Thompson's conviction for Crandall's murder and the release from jail of two men who had initially pleaded guilty to that crime. Specifically, prospective jurors were informed, verbatim, of the four aggravating circumstances the State had pleaded against Thompson in the death penalty information. And, he took Wesley Crandall's money that was there, and the marihuana. BOEHM, Justice. Jerry Thompson & Company, 45927 Cottonwood Hills Dr, Parker, CO (Owned by: Jerry W Thompson) holds a General A license and 1 other license according to the Douglas County license board. ON OCTOBER 27, 2002, THOMPSON WAS FOUND DEAD IN THE RECREATION AREA OF A CELLBLOCK ON "X ROW" AT THE INDIANA STATE PRISON IN MICHIGAN CITY, INDIANA. In April 1991, Thompson destroyed all the guns taken from Crandall except the handgun, a second gun also admitted in evidence, and a .22 derringer that was sold to a third party. B. This discussion of the Crandall murder followed: [W]hen [Percy] came forward to the Police he insisted that he needed to tell them about something that happened in New Castle, Indiana In February of 1991, [Thompson and Percy] went to New Castle, Indiana, to meet a man by the name of Wesley Crandall. 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 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. Because the State was properly allowed to show that Thompson stole the murder weapon from Crandall, whether Crandall actually had a gun similar to that weapon at the time he was killed was also relevant. Jerry Don Thompson serves as President of Voyager Energy Services and Vice President of Granbury Thompson Group offering SandX and Super Loop Products. The State maintained that it understood the pretrial ruling on Rule 404(b) to allow evidence of the conviction itself, and that it relied on this interpretation in referring to the conviction in opening arguments. . There are 10+ professionals named "Doug Percy", who use LinkedIn to exchange information, ideas, and opportunities. AT THE TIME, THOMPSON WAS ON DIRECT APPEAL FROM HIS DEATH SENTENCE FOLLOWING A RETRIAL IN MARION COUNTY. Citing several cases, the State nonetheless urges a more expansive view of the identity exception to include evidence of prior crimes in which an instrumentality used in the current crime was acquired. 1996) (internal quotation marks omitted). If there is one lesson to take from this case, it is that Thompson's questioning Percy's, credibility did not open a door through which all evidence related to the Crandall murder could automatically pass. Thompson and Percy had the first two guns with them when they were detained by Illinois police in June 1991.7. 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. Rule 404(b) is on the books because evidence of prior crimes is presumptively prejudicial. Mar 3, 2022 Mar 3, 2022; Facebook; Twitter; WhatsApp; SMS; . 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). When the defendant objects on the ground that the admission of particular evidence would violate Rule 404(b), the following test should be applied: (1) the court must determine that the evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is relevant to a matter at issue other than the defendant's propensity to commit the charged act; and (2) the court must balance the probative value of the evidence against its prejudicial effect pursuant to Rule 403. Thus it was error to inform jurors of Thompson's conviction of Crandall's murder prior to the penalty phase. 1994) (in action against prison officials under 42 U.S.C. 338, 367-68, 417 N.E.2d 889, 905-06 (1981); Evans v. State, 563 N.E.2d 1251, 1259 (Ind. Douglas Percy. 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. In April 1991, Thompson destroyed all the guns taken from Crandall except the handgun, a second gun also admitted in evidence, and a ".22 derringer" that was sold to a third party. Percy carried Thompson's sawed-off shotgun into the residence. This occurred with the apparent assent of all counsel. Percy is much taller then any student at Doug's school. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident . III. We have little difficulty concluding that the fact and manner of Crandall's death, and Thompson's murder conviction, were highly prejudicial to Thompson. 2056, 23 L.Ed.2d 707 (1969). Indeed, our decisions have cautioned that evidence of prior misconduct offered to bolster a key witness's testimony as to the current charge, although often probative on that point, is also quite prejudicial. 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. As the defense's opening statement put it: Who does [the State] say was with Mr. Thompson in New Castle? In its effort to prove guilt, the State may not flood the courtroom with unnecessary and prejudicial details of prior criminal conduct merely because some of that evidence is relevant and admissible. We first take up an issue not raised by the parties. However, the details of the killing, including the cause of death "as being two gunshot wounds in the head," id. In June 1991, defendant Jerry Thompson and Douglas Percy were driving through Illinois and were stopped for a traffic violation. Rather, the defense elicited from Percy that he had not been charged with any crime related to those events and that his charge for altering a vehicle identification number was dismissed in exchange for his cooperation in this case. The jury therefore knew from the outset that Thompson had been a killer and a thief in the past. Percy gave the following account. Percy Douglas Thompson Percy Douglas Thompson in Australia, Victoria Marriage Index, 1837-1942. 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. Jerry as Percy Frank's Father as Toby Bart (from The Simpsons) as Duck Carl (from The Simpsons) as Donald Lenny (from The Simpsons) as Douglas Milhouse (from The Simpsons) as Oliver Nelson (from The Simpsons) as Diesel Skipper (from Skipper & Skeeto) as Skarloey Skeeto (from Skipper & Skeeto) as Rheneas Thompson filed a motion in limine before trial objecting to the admission of any evidence related to Crandall's death, including the fact of Thompson's conviction for that murder. Id. He worked in the kitchens and as a driver and mechanic. 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. [T]he Evidence shows that [Percy] did nothing to kill either of those 3 men. Even where a prior criminal act is relevant to a material fact, the potential for unfair prejudice dictates that the evidence of the prior misconduct be limited to that necessary to prove the disputed fact. 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. . Even oblique or apparently innocuous references to prior convictions are impermissible. SHEPARD, C.J., concurs with separate opinion. 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. Because reversal in this case is due to trial error in the admission of evidence, the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, applicable to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,13 generally does not bar a retrial on the same crimes. Accordingly, even where the defendant's involvement in a prior murder is relevant in part, the circumstances of the killing should not be presented unless they too are relevant. The trial court denied Thompson's motion, ruling that the State could show "how a weapon of the crime was obtained. These criteria mirror Evidence Rules 401, 402, 403, and 404(b). Two witnesses -- the forensic pathologist and Percy's friend Mike Featheringill -- testified to how Crandall died. About; Contact; Login; Search. The prosecutor's contention at trial that the Crandall jury verdict constituted validation of Percy is a stretch no court can make. 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. for the killing of the man from whom this gun was taken." The list of other purposes in the Rule is not exhaustive; extrinsic act evidence may be admitted for any purpose not specified in Rule 404(b) unless precluded by the first sentence of Rule 404(b) or any other Rule.

Top 10 Teams In Europe 2021, Pakistani Gangsters Birmingham, Star Trek Adventures Core Rulebook Pdf, Airing The Addisons Email Address, Articles D