He didn't stomp on him; he didn't take a shotgun and nearly blow his head off. 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. There is no shortage of decisions reversing convictions due to the erroneous admission of the defendant's prior criminal history, specifically prior convictions. 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. Without that knowledge it is impossible to conclude what, if any, "validation" of Percy the conviction represents. Ultimately this case turns on whether the jury's exposure to the Crandall incident exceeded permissible bounds. 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 . denied; Pirnat v. State, 612 N.E.2d 153, 155 (Ind. See, e.g., Watson v. State, 540 N.E.2d 598 (Ind.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.1978) (evidence of prior robbery was properly allowed where the murder weapon was taken during the robbery and was later found in the house where the defendant was arrested).9 The issue, however, is whether that discretion was abused in the quantity and quality of the evidence admitted to corroborate Percy's testimony on this collateral point. Once he got his hands on a gun, any target would do. There is nothing in the record indicating on what basis it was admitted into evidence over Thompson's objection. However, the details of the killing, including the cause of death as being two gunshot wounds in the head, id. 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. 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." 1995). 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). These authorities, e.g., Maldonado v. State, 265 Ind. 3 Friends and Jerry/Thomas | Scratchpad | Fandom 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. 13. 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. In this review, we do not reweigh evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses. 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. It cannot be expected to make its decision in a void United States v. Moore, 735 F.2d 289, 292 (8th Cir.1984). 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. The rules of evidence require courts to guard against exploitation of those details. Percy Thompson Profiles | Facebook Application of the Indiana Rules of Evidence. 9. A few months earlier, Percy had been charged with altering a vehicle identification number, a felony. Lila Thompson (1967-1971), Percy Douglas (1984-1988), Shynese Sangster (2002-2006) Control profile. Hardin v. State, 611 N.E.2d 123, 129 (Ind. Moreover, the State emphasized the prior misconduct in its opening statement, during the case in chief, and again in its closing argument. . For this reason, it has long been established that prospective jurors are not to know of prior convictions until the penalty phase. Arguably this prerequisite is not satisfied here. Douglas (Doug) Jerry Thompson | Obituaries | syvnews.com 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. 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. SHEPARD, C.J., concurs with separate opinion. 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. Without explanation, the trial court ruled that the conviction was admissible. 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. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident 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. See, e.g., Taylor v. State, 659 N.E.2d 535, 542-43 (Ind.1995). 2056, 23 L.Ed.2d 707 (1969). He worked in the kitchens and as a driver and mechanic. Douglas Percy. 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). Rule 404(b) is on the books because evidence of prior crimes is presumptively prejudicial. . What does Mr. Percy have to lose? And, he took Wesley Crandall's money that was there, and the marihuana. 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. doug percy jerry thompson 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. Rather, he chose to attack Percy's credibility. Jerry Thompson Facebook Log In Jerry Thompson Friends Photos Videos More Friends Photos Videos Jerry Thompson About Work No workplaces to show College 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 pathologist opined that Crandall died from a gunshot wound to the head. The jury's verdict reflects a decision to credit Percy's testimony that this Court, as an appellate tribunal, would ordinarily not question. Facebook gives people the power to share and makes the world more open and connected. The prosecutor's contention at trial that the Crandall jury verdict constituted validation of Percy is a stretch no court can make. The trial court ruled that the State would be allowed "to simply explain presence and then cut it off and let's get on." United States v. Smith, 80 F.3d 1188, 1193 (7th Cir.1996) (internal quotation marks omitted). 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. THOMPSON, Douglas "Doug" Jerry - Santa Barbara News-Press "See footnote 5 Brewer, 275 Ind. Percy's motive to implicate Thompson arose instantaneously because Percy essentially admitted to an accomplice role in the murders; Percy had every reason to shift culpability to Thompson while minimizing his own involvement. 1996). Jerry is related to Virginia Ann Thompson . Jerry K. Thompson was convicted of two counts of murder,See footnote 1 two counts of robbery,See footnote 2 and one count of carrying a handgun without a license.See footnote 3 The trial court sentenced Thompson to death for the murders and imposed a term of years for the other convictions. . The propensity evidence in this case crossed that line by a wide margin. You are here: cape breton post latest obits; david caruso art business; doug percy jerry thompson . The proffered conviction here does not approach the probative value required to outweigh that prejudice under Rule 403. It also placed Percy himself at each of these crime scenes. 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.