doug percy jerry thompson

Genealogy record of %1. [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. 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. 1995). And, as Evans put it, if the aggravating circumstances are prior unrelated crimes it is necessary that the information of prior crimes be withheld from the jury until the instant case is decided. Evans, 563 N.E.2d at 1259. Wooden v. State, 657 N.E.2d 109, 111 (Ind. The bag Thompson carried contained several guns and Percy's bag contained marijuana and shell casings. 285, 102 L.Ed.2d 265 (1988). It could be argued that the evidentiary errors during the guilt phase were therefore harmless. He had no conscience about rape, child molestation, or thrashing a dozen men in a prison fight. 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. Before the trial in this case, Thompson was tried and convicted in Henry County of murdering Crandall. This occurred with the apparent assent of all counsel. The State then suggested that because the jury in the Crandall murder trial had apparently credited Percy's testimony, the same should be done here: [Percy] was scrutinized in New Castle and in Henry County, by that Jury; and they returned a conviction for the killing of the man from whom this gun was taken. 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. The guards noticed a disturbance. People at Inforver; . 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. Jerry Thompson Facebook Log In Jerry Thompson Friends Photos Videos More Friends Photos Videos Jerry Thompson About Work No workplaces to show College A. Fox v. State, 497 N.E.2d 221, 224 (Ind.1986). Doug's military training took place in Hastings. Cf. In and of itself, no. On February 12, 1991, two days prior to the murder, Thompson instructed his girlfriend to purchase a twelve-gauge shotgun and ammunition. 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. 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. There are 10+ professionals named "Doug Percy", who use LinkedIn to exchange information, ideas, and opportunities. The State's closing argument was replete with references to the Crandall murder, to the extent that an uninformed reader would assume that Thompson was being tried for the Crandall murder in this case. . 1696, 12 L.Ed.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.1994) (in action against prison officials under 42 U.S.C. Champlain v. State, 681 N.E.2d 696, 702 (Ind.1997). 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"). . Counsel contended that the evidence was entirely consistent with Percy's having committed the murders and that his testimony has been bought and paid for, a number of ways and as such is suspect.. [T]he Evidence shows that [Percy] did nothing to kill either of those 3 men. Cf. 1993) (in prosecution for child molesting, "[t]estimony regarding the previous [child molesting] conviction and details of the previous molestation were obviously highly prejudicial") (citation and footnote omitted); United States v. Cox, 536 F.2d 65, 72 (5th Cir. B. "See footnote 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. It cannot be expected to make its decision in a void United States v. Moore, 735 F.2d 289, 292 (8th Cir.1984). Percy testified that Thompson shot Crandall. Brewer v. State, 275 Ind. On February 14, 1991, he and Thompson went to Crandall's house to buy marijuana. And, he took Wesley Crandall's money that was there, and the marihuana. Wesley Crandall was a small time marihuana dealer; they went there in a pick-up truck, and Jerry Thompson took his shotgun along. Far more importantly what somebody has to lose. 6. Here, one of the aggravating circumstances charged in addition to the prior murder was that Thompson intentionally killed Hillis and Beeler while committing or attempting to commit a robbery. Without explanation, the trial court ruled that the conviction was admissible. That charge was eventually dismissed in exchange for Percy's testifying about the deaths of Hillis and Beeler. ; see generally Robert L. Miller Jr., Courtroom Handbook on Indiana Evidence 61 (1998 ed.). I. 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. 49G03-9204-CF-60651, I join fully in the majority opinion, but write separately to make an observation pertinent to the second trial. Thompson v. State, 671 N.E.2d 1165 (Ind.1996). Jerry Don Thompson (born November 21, 1942) is Regents Professor of History at Texas A&M International University in Laredo, Texas. 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. We cannot conclude that these evidentiary errors were harmless. Brewer v. State, 275 Ind. Who does [the State] say was with Jerry Thompson on March 14th of 1991, at Hillis Auto Sales? Douglas is related to Greg S Percy and Theresa Marie Percy as well as 1 additional person. 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. The State's contention that the extra details of the Crandall murder helped prove identity is unpersuasive. See, e.g., Heavrin v. State, 675 N.E.2d 1075, 1083 (Ind.1996). 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. If the fact of conviction for a prior murder is presumptively prejudicial, the gruesome details of that offense may be even more damaging. In light of this disposition, it is unnecessary to. 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. 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. At FindLaw.com, we pride ourselves on being the number one source of free legal information and resources on the web. 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 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. The trial court denied Thompson's motion, ruling that the State could show how a weapon of the crime was obtained. 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. 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. [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." Without that knowledge it is impossible to conclude what, if any, validation of Percy the conviction represents. This [is] the gun that came from there. 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. ), APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable John R. Barney Jr., Judge Cause NO. Under these circumstances, the errors were not harmless.11 See Wickizer v. State, 626 N.E.2d 795, 800-01 (Ind.1993) (holding that improperly admitted evidence of prior acts was not harmless error where the State emphasized the disputed conduct in its opening and closing arguments); James v. State, 622 N.E.2d 1303, 1309-10 (Ind.Ct.App.1993) (erroneous admission of propensity evidence was not harmless due to prosecutor's steady drumbeat of references to the defendant's prior criminal record, especially in closing arguments). 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. There is no shortage of decisions reversing convictions due to the erroneous admission of the defendant's prior criminal history, specifically prior convictions. BOEHM, Justice. 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. 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. 0. I don't think a signature, in quotes, is a required. The prosecutor's contention at trial that the Crandall jury verdict constituted validation of Percy is a stretch no court can make. 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). ." 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. Because the risk that the jury would draw the forbidden inference based on what happened in Henry County is undeniable, the probative value of the extra details of the Crandall murder was substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. 1991) ("bootstrapping" testimony related to extrinsic acts is admissible but only to the extent it is relevant to a material fact). 1995) (evidence as to defendant's four prior, convictions for dealing in cocaine should not have been admitted in prosecution for cocaine possession), trans. In June 1991, defendant Jerry Thompson and Douglas Percy were driving through Illinois and were stopped for a traffic violation. The prosecutor referred not only to Percy's allegations, but also to their validation in the form of Thompson's murder conviction. Thompson and Percy each grabbed a large trash bag and drove back to Indianapolis. 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. 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. 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. 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). The defense asked jurors to think about what somebody's got to gain when they testify. . To be admissible under this Rule, Percy's motive to fabricate had to have arisen after the prior statement was made. 1992). denied; Pirnat v. State, 612 N.E.2d 153, 155 (Ind. What does Mr. Percy have to lose? 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. For this reason, it has long been established that prospective jurors are not to know of prior convictions until the penalty phase. If the extraneous details of the killing were inadmissible in Ostrowsky-a case involving car theft-the prejudice to Thompson in a second murder prosecution is an a fortiori case. Percy is much taller then any student at Doug's school. The State all but urged the jury to make the forbidden inference. What particular parts of this mass might be fair rebuttal will, of course, depend on how the two parties elect to shape the presentation of their principal cases. 8. II. 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.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 1991, and ballistics tests confirmed to be 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. 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. He has a very deep voice, and his hairstyle is a crew cut with a single strand of hair in a ponytail. 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. Lannan v. State, 600 N.E.2d 1334 (Ind.1992). 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. Indeed, the State does not contend that these were signature crimes. Facebook gives people the power. 1974), the defendants were charged with concealing a stolen car and moving it in interstate commerce. 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. In the next few weeks, Thompson used Percy's garage to grind the serial numbers off the weapons taken from Crandall's residence. 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. We first examine what went on in the trial court. 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. 5. FindLaw.com Free, trusted legal information for consumers and legal professionals, SuperLawyers.com Directory of U.S. attorneys with the exclusive Super Lawyers rating, Abogado.com The #1 Spanish-language legal website for consumers, LawInfo.com Nationwide attorney directory and legal consumer resources. The State's contention that the extra details of the Crandall murder helped prove identity is unpersuasive. 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 . This cause is remanded for a new trial. . The rules of evidence require courts to guard against exploitation of those details. doug percy jerry thompson. 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. Ultimately this case turns on whether the jury's exposure to the Crandall incident exceeded permissible bounds. Facebook gives people the power to share and makes the world more open and connected. DICKSON, SULLIVAN and SELBY, JJ., concur. 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. 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). 10. For this reason, it has long been established that prospective jurors are not to know of prior convictions until the penalty phase. cuando tu pareja te miente frases virginia rockhounding map doug percy jerry thompson. 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. 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. 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. Without stating the basis for its ruling, the trial court allowed Featheringill's testimony. at 368, 417 N.E.2d at 906. It is always difficult saying goodbye to someone we love and cherish. As discussed in footnote 8 supra, this is a prior consistent statement. 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. 3. . 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. And, as Evans put it, if the aggravating circumstances are "prior unrelated crimes . He appeals. Their BuildZoom score of 92 ranks in the top 32% of 55,949 Colorado licensed contractors. Conviction there could have been based on forensic or other evidence wholly independent of Percy's testimony. 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 charging information, witness list, and verdict form from Henry County were admitted into evidence at that point. 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. Percy did not see the location of the shot, but assumed that Thompson had shot Crandall in the head. In June 1991, defendant Jerry Thompson and Douglas Percy were driving through Illinois and were stopped for a traffic violation. 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. The propensity evidence in this case crossed that line by a wide margin. 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. 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. United States v. Smith, 80 F.3d 1188, 1193 (7th Cir.1996) (internal quotation marks omitted). I don't think a signature, in quotes, is a required. She testified that in December 1990 she sold Crandall a handgun similar to the alleged murder weapon in this case. All rights reserved. On cross-examination, the defense did not directly challenge Percy's account of what happened in New Castle. Unnecessary and inflammatory detail may require reversal. As the Eighth Circuit put it in rejecting a Federal Evidence Rule 404(b) challenge: A jury is entitled to know the circumstances and background of a criminal charge. Loveless v. State, 240 Ind. in the event that any such attack may open the door to the use of such evidence." 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. Rather, he chose to attack Percy's credibility. 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. Wooden v. State, 657 N.E.2d 109, 111 (Ind.1995). The fact of a shotgun wound could perhaps have been established by a police officer or otherwise without getting into whether it was fatal. The jury's verdict reflects a decision to credit Percy's testimony that this Court, as an appellate tribunal, would ordinarily not question. If so, the jury necessarily learns of the aggravating circumstance in the course of the guilt phase. And, he took Wesley Crandall's money that was there, and the marihuana. The details of the prior murder were irrelevant. What does Mr. Percy have to lose? The proffered conviction here does not approach the probative value required to outweigh that prejudice under Rule 403. 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.5 Brewer, 275 Ind. Reading of Death Penalty Information in Voir Dire. Jerry Thompson is on Facebook. 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. Once he got his hands on a gun, any target would do. While we have reversed on the basis of evidence improperly admitted during the State's case in chief, it might turn out that discrete pieces of this evidence would be admissible as rebuttal. 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. [2] Lannan v. State, 600 N.E.2d 1334 (Ind. 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. 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. The jury therefore knew from the outset that Thompson had been a killer and a thief in the past. One thing was certain, by the time he reached manhood, Jerry Thompson was a savage killer. 2d 265 (1988). at 368, 417 N.E.2d at 906. Police say Jerry Thompson and seven other prisoners were out of their cells for their recreation time Sunday afternoon at the Michigan City facility. Percy was the only witness conclusively placing Thompson at the scene. 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 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 in the event that any such attack may open the door to the use of such evidence. In a second motion in limine, Thompson responded that this evidence was not admissible under the identity exception because the Indianapolis killings and the Crandall murder were not signature crimes. 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 carried Thompson's sawed-off shotgun into the residence. Opening arguments The State emphasized the details of Crandall's killing from the beginning. 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.

How Much Is A Sixpence Worth In Us Dollars, How To Set Up Spectrum Landline Voicemail, What Happened To Nell On Ncis: Los Angeles, Dr Scott Becker Accident, Meat Mincer Tesco, Articles D