Citing Evidence Rules 402 (relevance) and 403 (balance of probative value and prejudice), Thompson argues that the State elicited far more evidence about Crandall's death than was necessary to prove this aspect of its case. In February of 1991, [Thompson and Percy] went to New Castle, Indiana, to meet a man by the name of Wesley Crandall. Mar 3, 2022 Mar 3, 2022; Facebook; Twitter; WhatsApp; SMS; . On March 14, 1991, Melvin Hillis and Robert Beeler were shot to death at Hillis Auto Sales in Indianapolis. Thompson was charged and a jury convicted him on all counts. at 367, 417 N.E.2d at 906. Wesley Crandall was a small time marihuana dealer; they went there in a pick-up truck, and Jerry Thompson took his shotgun along. Evidence of Prior Uncharged Misconduct. . II. 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. B. As Percy waited nearby in the living room, Thompson and Crandall spoke in the kitchen. 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. The exception's rationale is that the crimes, or means used to commit them, were so similar and unique that it is highly probable that the same person committed all of them. He worked in the kitchens and as a driver and mechanic. Leonard v. United States, 378 U.S. 544, 84 S.Ct. 1996). Thompson and Percy had the first two guns with them when they were detained by Illinois police in June 1991.7. The State all but urged the jury to make the forbidden inference. 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. 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. He offers broad experience in skills like . For this reason, it has long been established that prospective jurors are not to know of prior convictions until the penalty phase. Jerry Thompson, his brothers David (Lisa) and Dan (Ana) Thompson, his nephews, Lucas . 9. The fact that Crandall died and the fact that Thompson was convicted of his murder did not bear on any aspect of Percy's credibility because Percy did not testify to either subject. 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. 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. 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. The prosecutor referred not only to Percy's allegations, but also to their validation in the form of Thompson's murder conviction. Thompson argues that the trial court erred in admitting the testimony of Columbus, Indiana gun dealer Velma Brown. In the end, an impermissible flood of damaging propensity evidence washed away Thompson's right to a fair trial. Jerry Don Thompson (born November 21, 1942) is Regents Professor of History at Texas A&M International University in Laredo, Texas. The rules of evidence require courts to guard against exploitation of those details. [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." 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. Inexplicably, Featheringill was also permitted to relate, Percy's account of an "execution style" shooting.See footnote 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. Mr. Thompson was ultimately convicted of the murder of Wesley Crandall in February of 1991. 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. Accordingly, over Thompson's objection, an officer with the New Castle Police Department was allowed to testify that he attended Thompson's trial in Henry County for Crandall's murder, thirty to forty witnesses were called (including Percy), and that the jury convicted Thompson. Thompson retrieved a pillow from another room, placed it over Crandall's head, and fired. The email address cannot be subscribed. When Featheringill was asked about the events in New Castle, the defense objected on hearsay grounds. The trial court denied Thompson's motion, ruling that the State could show how a weapon of the crime was obtained. Far more importantly what somebody has to lose. The relevance and balancing issues are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Douglas (Doug) Jerry Thompson February 18, 2022. 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. . Fox v. State, 497 N.E.2d 221, 224 (Ind.1986). Jerry Thompson Facebook Log In Jerry Thompson Friends Photos Videos More Friends Photos Videos Jerry Thompson About Work No workplaces to show College She testified that in December 1990 she sold Crandall a handgun similar to the alleged murder weapon in this case. 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. Next, an evidentiary dispute arose over whether the court's pretrial ruling on Thompson's motion in limine, allowing the State to introduce evidence of the obtaining of the weapon, permitted the State to introduce the fact of Thompson's conviction for the Crandall murder. . However, the jury's apparent decision to believe Percy may have turned on the wrongly admitted evidence. He then went to Seattle and graduated from the University of Washington. 4. Next, an evidentiary dispute arose over whether the court's pretrial ruling on, Thompson's motion in limine, allowing the State to introduce "evidence of the obtaining of the weapon," permitted the State to introduce the fact of Thompson's conviction for the Crandall murder. 338, 367-68, 417 N.E.2d 889, 905-06 (1981); Evans v. State, 563 N.E.2d 1251, 1259 (Ind. Percy did not see the location of the shot, but assumed that Thompson had shot Crandall in the head. Without explanation, the trial court ruled that the conviction was admissible. And, he took Wesley Crandall's money that was there, and the marihuana. His testimony was an essential element in the chain of evidence pointing to Thompson as the killer. 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. It was noted at oral argument in this Court that due to the erroneous (but unobjected) reading of the death penalty information in voir dire, the jury was advised from the outset of Thompson's conviction of Crandall's murder. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. 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. The defense argued that the court's pretrial ruling permitted evidence that the gun allegedly used to kill Hillis and Beeler had been taken from Crandall when he was killed, and nothing more. Id. 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." 1983, trial court committed reversible error by informing jury sua sponte during voir dire of inmate's prior convictions for rape and sexual assault). Evans, 563 N.E.2d at 1259. Who does [the State] say was with Jerry Thompson on March 14th of 1991, at Hillis Auto Sales? Fox v. State, 497 N.E.2d 221, 224 (Ind. The jury therefore knew from the outset that Thompson had been a killer and a thief in the past. In June 1991, defendant Jerry Thompson and Douglas Percy were driving through Illinois and were stopped for a traffic violation. The State responded that his testimony was admissible under Evidence Rule 801(d)(1)(B) as a prior consistent statement to rebut Thompson's recent charge of improper motive. Sign up for our free summaries and get the latest delivered directly to you. . See, e.g., Heavrin v. State, 675 N.E.2d 1075, 1083 (Ind. 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. Also known as Jerry Gthompson. 7. 1992). 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. Although corroboration of collateral facts is sometimes permissible to show credibility, see, e.g., Ind.Evidence Rule 801(d)(1)(B), corroborative proof is limited by several considerations: (1) whether the challenged witness actually testified to what is sought to be corroborated; (2) whether the corroboration helps prove a material fact (relevance); and (3) whether the corroborative evidence, assuming it is relevant, is nonetheless so prejudicial that it must be excluded under Evidence Rule 403. There are 10+ professionals named "Doug Percy", who use LinkedIn to exchange information, ideas, and opportunities. View the profiles of people named Percy Thompson. 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. If the fact of conviction for a prior murder is presumptively prejudicial, the gruesome details of that offense may be even more damaging. II. 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). Cf. 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. View the profiles of people named Jerry Thompson Thompson. Facebook gives. The proffered conviction here does not approach the probative value required to outweigh that prejudice under Rule 403. Id. The defense asked jurors to "think about what somebody's got to gain when they testify. See, e.g., Heavrin v. State, 675 N.E.2d 1075, 1083 (Ind.1996). B. 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). 0. It also placed Percy himself at each of these crime scenes. Even oblique or apparently innocuous references to prior convictions are impermissible. The trial court denied Thompson's motion, ruling that the State could show "how a weapon of the crime was obtained. . Ind.Code 35-50-2-9(b)(1) (Supp.1990). 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. The propensity evidence in this case crossed that line by a wide margin. This Court has jurisdiction under Indiana Appellate Rule 4(A)(7). [2] 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. [T]he Evidence shows that [Percy] did nothing to kill either of those 3 men. The State did not refer at this stage, however, to the point for which evidence of the Crandall murder was originally held to be admissible -- to show that Thompson had access to the murder weapon before the crimes. 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). Evidence Rule 801(d)(1)(B), corroborative proof is limited by several considerations: (1) whether the challenged witness actually testified to what is sought to be corroborated; (2) whether the corroboration helps prove a material fact (relevance); and (3) whether the corroborative evidence, assuming it is relevant, is nonetheless so prejudicial that it must be excluded under Evidence Rule 403. In any event, the jury in this case did not and could not know all of the record in the Crandall trial. 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. He appeals. . United States v. Burke, 948 F.2d 23 (1st Cir. Percy did not testify that Crandall was killed in his presence, only that he assumed Thompson shot him in the head. 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. I. I don't think a signature, in quotes, is a required. Instead what happened, was Jerry Thompson took his shotgun and he blew part of Wesley Crandall's head off, and killed him. 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. Indeed, the State does not contend that these were signature crimes. Percy carried Thompson's sawed-off shotgun into the residence. cuando tu pareja te miente frases virginia rockhounding map doug percy jerry thompson. The details of the prior murder were irrelevant 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. Without explanation, the trial court ruled that the conviction was admissible. 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. 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. In the next few weeks, Thompson used Percy's garage to grind the serial numbers off the weapons taken from Crandall's residence. Observing that Thompson had challenged Percy's credibility in opening arguments, the State maintained that some detail was needed to give the jury "sufficient context" in which to understand, and therefore credit, Percy's testimony about how Thompson acquired the gun used to kill Hillis and Beeler. The fact of Thompson's conviction for murdering Crandall was wholly irrelevant to establishing his access to the murder weapon. 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. 1976) (admission of a "rap sheet" detailing the defendant's criminal record, including prior convictions, was reversible error). On cross-examination, the defense did not directly challenge Percy's account of what happened in New Castle. The serial numbers on the handgun were ground off. Douglas Percy. The details of the prior murder were irrelevant. The rules of evidence require courts to guard against exploitation of those details. 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. 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. The relevance and balancing issues are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. The State also claims that any prejudice to Thompson was offset by a limiting instruction to the jury to constrain its consideration of prior acts to the issue of identity. 2d 265 (1988). 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. He didn't stomp on him; he didn't take a shotgun and nearly blow his head off. 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. More importantly, evidence of a prior conviction is as prejudicial as evidence can get, and requires a strong showing of probative value. If the fact of conviction for a prior murder is presumptively prejudicial, the gruesome details of that offense may be even more damaging. Accordingly, over Thompson's objection, an officer with the New Castle Police Department was allowed to testify that he attended Thompson's trial in Henry County for Crandall's murder, thirty to forty witnesses were called (including Percy), and that the jury convicted Thompson. However, the details of the killing, including the cause of death as being two gunshot wounds in the head, id. 1991) (distinguishing Ostrowsky and lauding trial court's "sanitized and tightly controlled" admission of evidence of prior murder and "vigilant efforts to minimize its prejudicial impact"). Lannan v. State, 600 N.E.2d 1334 (Ind.1992). After testifying as to the Indianapolis victims, he also testified that Crandall had died of a gunshot wound to the head. 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 serial numbers on the handgun were ground off. Contact us. Genealogy record of %1. Rather, he chose to attack Percy's credibility. This cause is remanded for a new trial. On a prearranged signal, Percy gave the gun to Thompson, who knocked Crandall, down and stated that he thought he had broken Crandall's neck. 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). This [is] the gun that came from there. Percy testified that Thompson shot Crandall. If Percy's testimony about Thompson's taking the murder weapon from Crandall was the permissible core evidence showing Thompson's access to the gun, the other details-an execution style shooting, Thompson's conviction for the Crandall murder-were a penumbra of dubious relevance and potentially inflammatory impact. United States v. York, 933 F.2d 1343, 1353-54 (7th Cir.1991) (distinguishing Ostrowsky and lauding trial court's sanitized and tightly controlled admission of evidence of prior murder and vigilant efforts to minimize its prejudicial impact). 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. I. 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. 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 [T]he Evidence shows that [Percy] did nothing to kill either of those 3 men. These criteria mirror Evidence Rules 401, 402, 403, and 404(b). Get free summaries of new Supreme Court of Indiana opinions delivered to your inbox! 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. The State also claims that any prejudice to Thompson was offset by a limiting instruction to the jury to constrain its consideration of prior acts to the issue of identity. 1995). 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. Select this result to view Jerry Wayne Thompson's phone number, address, and more. 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. What particular pa. You're all set! 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. Stay up-to-date with how the law affects your life. If so, the jury necessarily learns of the aggravating circumstance in the course of the guilt phase. 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. Percy's credibility was critical to the State's case. 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). Their BuildZoom score of 92 ranks in the top 32% of 55,949 Colorado licensed contractors. Select this result to view Douglas A Percy's phone number, address, and more. . See, e.g., Taylor v. State, 659 N.E.2d 535, 542-43 (Ind. As Brewer held, there was no reversible error in informing the jury of that aggravator before the sentencing phase, even if reading any of the charged aggravators is neither necessary nor a desirable practice in capital cases. Instead what happened, was Jerry Thompson took his shotgun and he blew part of Wesley Crandall's head off, and killed him. By - June 16, 2022. for the killing of the man from whom this gun was taken." Join Facebook to connect with Jerry Thompson and others you may know. 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. He did not break 5'10, 130 pound Wesley Crandall's neck. 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. 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. Bone.. Looks. AT THE TIME, THOMPSON WAS ON DIRECT APPEAL FROM HIS DEATH SENTENCE FOLLOWING A RETRIAL IN MARION COUNTY. The issue is whether evidence beyond that appropriate to establish access to the gun was admitted and, if so, whether it was harmless error.