Outlet number 1, the outlet behind Mason's bed, was misplaced at the scene, and Russellville firefighters sifted through the debris for 8 to 10 hours to try and locate the outlet, but were unsuccessful. As a result of the second fire the Scotts received insurance monies of over $185,000. indicated that she was impartial, that she could follow the law, and that she could apply the law to the facts of the case. Neither defense expert testified that faulty outlets were the cause of the fire; rather, they testified that the fire started in the television cabinet in the boys' room. It added that it had seen no case in which a defendant had killed six victims pursuant to one scheme or course of conduct. A party who has brought out evidence on a certain subject has no valid complaint as to the trial court's action in allowing his opponent or adversary to introduce evidence on the same subject. Hubbard v. State, 471 So.2d 497, 499 (Ala.Crim.App.1984) (quoting Brown v. State, 392 So.2d 1248, 1260 (Ala.Crim.App.1980), cert. Hagood v. State, 777 So.2d 162, 203 (Ala.Crim.App.1998). 844, 83 L.Ed.2d 841 (1985), is considered to be impartial even though it may be more conviction prone than a non-death-qualified jury. ), Depending on the degree of the State's culpability for the loss of the evidence, the court may decide that the State should be precluded, on retrial, from introducing any evidence relating to the charred object, see Commonwealth v. Olszewski, 401 Mass. denied, 423 U.S. 951, 96 S.Ct. According to Colby, A.K. One of three alternative counts was that Ms. Scott is indicted for, as far as a motive, for pecuniary gain. Davis testified that the house did not sell in the six-month listing period and that the Scotts did not relist the house. WebView the profiles of people named Christie Michelle. be removed from the venire for cause (an issue we do not reach), they would need to show that its ruling somehow injured them by leaving them with a less-than-impartial jury. Join Facebook to connect with Scott Christie and others you may know. These jurisdictions hold that when the state loses or destroys evidence, the state is subjected to a higher due process standard under their state constitutions than the bad faith test as stated in Arizona v. Youngblood. Contact us. ]: Yeah. Jana Boyd, a stylist at the WalMart hair salon, testified that a lady came in the store on the Monday after the fire and that Swinney got upset and Boyd had to wait on the customer. at 1499.. McClendon v. State, 243 Ala. 218, 8 So.2d 883 (1942). 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. Is that not what you said? And that was the reason we struck her.. Thornton testified that outlet number 3 had been in his possession, that he had sent the outlet to the defense expert, that the outlet was returned to him, that he had until trial believed that the outlet was not from Mason's bedroom, and that he realized after examining all the numerous photographs that the outlet was in fact outlet number 3 from Mason's bedroom. 1297, 122 L.Ed.2d 687 (1993).. I mean, that's just the truth. 615 (1955)). As with the state of mind of a juror, evaluation of the prosecutor's state of mind based on demeanor and credibility lie peculiarly within a trial judge's province. Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412, 428, 105 S.Ct. Evidence of the 2006 fires was properly admitted under the motive exception to the general exclusionary rule. Judicial inquiry does not end with a determination that the evidence of another crime is relevant and probative of a necessary element of the charged offense. The Court: Just address it specifically to this case. During voir dire, after Scott read the juror questionnaires, Scott renewed her motion for a change of venue. A ring, valued at $14,750, was added to the insurance policy in November 2005. 2. A combination of specialized training, work experience and practical application of the expert's knowledge can combine to establish that person as an expert Courts can also consider whether a witness has previously been qualified as an expert. State v. Marlowe, 81 So.3d 944, 970 (La.Ct.App.2011). denied, 481 U.S. 1033, 107 S.Ct. The Supreme Court stated: Section 122113, Ala.Code 1975, provides: Physical evidence connected with or collected in the investigation of a crime shall not be excluded from consideration by a jury or court due to a failure to prove the chain of custody of the evidence. This Court reversed the circuit court's suppression order on the authority of Youngblood. ), Jerry Yarborough, a paramedic with Pleasant Bay Ambulance Service, testified that when Scott's father arrived at the scene he was upset and said to Scott: Where's my babies? Moreover, the trial court should not impose a sanction which is harsher than necessary to accomplish the goals of the discovery rules. 1419, 128 L.Ed.2d 89 (1994). ], once again it comes down to two things on him. denied, 398 So.2d 376 (Ala.1981); see C. Gamble, McElroy's Alabama Evidence, 190.03 (5th ed.1996).. 1489.) 1260.) Freeman testified that the outlet the television was plugged into had the least damage of any of them in the room. (R. The presumptive prejudice standard is rarely applicable, and is reserved for only extreme situations. Coleman v. Kemp, 778 F.2d at 1537. (2) Materiality of the lost outlet. Deputy Edwards responded that Scott was trying to take control of the interview. We noted that Huddleston [v. United States, 485 U.S. 681, 108 S.Ct. See Ex parte Belisle, 11 So.3d 323, 333 (Ala.2008) ( [A]n appellate court presume[s] that the jury follows the trial court's instructions unless there is evidence to the contrary. (quoting Cochran v. Ward, 935 So.2d 1169, 1176 (Ala.2006))). Do you believe the death penalty should be imposed in some of those kind of cases every time? She said that Scott showed no emotion. Linzy v. State, 455 So.2d 260, 262 (Ala.Crim.App.1984). Born Laura Bambrough, the statuesque beauty left her home state of Utah as a teenager to become a model in Paris. It is not required that the evidence submitted by the accused as a non-statutory mitigating circumstance be weighed as a mitigating circumstance by the sentencer, in this case, the trial court; although consideration of all mitigating circumstances is required, the decision of whether a particular mitigating circumstance is proven and the weight to be given it rests with the sentencer. Testimony showed that Bray had been called in the middle of the night to come to his daughter's house because her house was on fire. When the house fire happened, the four-year-old son Mason, was in Scotts bedroom, and he was sleeping. Can you do that? 33 So.3d at 1286. On cross-examination, Lentini testified that he had an opportunity to examine this outlet when he arrived in town to testify but he did not do so. You don't feel like you could set aside what you've heard and the fact you've workedwhen you say the boy's grandpa, are you talking. Web788k Followers, 4,238 Following, 1,086 Posts - See Instagram photos and videos from @chrisettemichele See Hudson v. State, 992 So.2d 96, 112 (Fla.2008). When she got back to the front door, she said, Scott told her that her other son, Mason, was still in the house. The evidence of the past fire cannot be used as substantive evidence that the defendant committed this charged offense that she is charged with now.. Please try again. This section provides: In deciding upon the sentence, the trial court shall determine whether the aggravating circumstances it finds to exist outweigh the mitigating circumstances it finds to exist, and in doing so the trial court shall consider the recommendation of the jury contained in its advisory verdict, unless such a verdict has been waived pursuant to Section 13A546(a) or Section 13A546(g). [2428,] 2443, 153 L.Ed.2d 556 [ (2002) ]. 2633.) Munger testified that his firm is often retained to do an origin and cause analysis of a fire, that since 1984 he has been on the adjunct faculty for the National Fire Academy, that he taught and developed courses in fire prevention and fire investigation, that he had done some instructional work for the Alabama Fire College, that from 1980 through 1985 he was a deputy fire marshal in Montgomery and was responsible for 11 counties, that prior to becoming a fire marshal he had been a firefighter in the City of Cullman for three years, that he had taken specialty classes from the National Fire Academy, that he had attended seminars in fire investigation, that he has attended numerous classes sponsored by the National Fire Academy, that he had attended training seminars sponsored by the Department of Homeland Security, that he had attended classes sponsored by the International Association of Arson Investigators, that his doctoral dissertation was on residential smoke alarms, that he is member of the National Fire Protection Association and the Society of Fire Protection Engineers, that he had been qualified as expert in fire protection or fire causes in several hundred cases, that he had received various professional awards for his work, that he had published articles on the subject of fire prevention and investigation, and that he had been certified as an expert by the Alabama Supreme Court. Belser v. State, 727 N.E.2d 457, 465 (Ind.App.2000). The circuit court did not abuse its considerable discretion in determining that Munger was an expert in the field of fire science based on his extensive qualifications and the Supreme Court's opinion in Carruth. Scott cites no new evidence or argument that distinguishes this case from Ex parte Belisle. Same objection. Cpt. 408.) In Briggs v. State, 549 So.2d 155 (Ala.Crim.App.1989), the defendant was convicted of arson and argued on appeal that the circuit court erred in admitting evidence of two earlier fires for which he had never been charged. The standard of review in reviewing a claim under the plain-error doctrine is stricter than the standard used in reviewing an issue that was properly raised in the trial court or on appeal. Hall v. State, 820 So.2d 113, 121 (Ala.Crim.App.1999). 852 So.2d at 837. P. Mills [v. Maryland, 486 U.S. 367, 108 S.Ct. Other states have also considered this issue since the United States Supreme Court's decision in Baze v. Rees, 553 U.S. 35, 128 S.Ct. See Madison v. State, supra, at 100.. 3375, 87 L.Ed.2d 481 (1985). Bennefield v. State, 281 Ala. 283, 286, 202 So.2d 55, 58 (1967); Blue v. State, 246 Ala. 73, 81, 19 So.2d 11, 18 (1944). Though C.M. The greater the amount of insurance, the greater [the defendant's] motive for killing [the victim]. State v. Clay, 115 Wis.2d 697, 341 N.W.2d 417 (1983). The record shows that at the beginning of voir dire after the court had played a videotape to the jury pool concerning jury service, the circuit court indicated for the record that it had excused juror D.T. 99798.). So I don't feel like I need to be on it. Copeland ran to the Scott's house to try and find a way inside to help Mason. Cpt. This Court is convinced that other defendants have been sentenced to death for murders that are less heinous, atrocious and cruel than this murder. 3922.) An invited error is waived, unless it rises to the level of plain error. Ex parte Bankhead, 585 So.2d 112, 126 (Ala.1991). ' Saunders v. State, 10 So.3d 53, 88 (Ala.Crim.App.2007), quoting Scott v. State, 937 So.2d 1065, 1075 (Ala.Crim.App.2005), quoting in turn Adams v. State, 955 So.2d 1037, 105051 (Ala.Crim.App.2003). But you could, you could do that and you could follow the Court's instructions about that? After Cpt. should be removed for cause based on his responses to questions concerning the appropriateness of the sentence. Such a recommendation is to be treated as a mitigating circumstance. Consequently, not only must it be determined that the other offenses are material and relevant to an issue other than the character of the accused and fall within an exception to the exclusionary rule, but the probative value must not be substantially outweighed by undue prejudice. The prosecutor stated the following concerning juror M.W. 1818.) I really didn't read any instructions about the, I guess you would say, innocent, or negligent mishandling of that. Residual doubt is not a factor that should be used in the sentencing portion of the case; however, the jury may have considered this. A fire starting within the television cabinet will produce the extremely high levels of [carbon monoxide] found in the blood of the victim., (R. 2562.) I woke up at 2:00 and 2:30, and I was justit's just too close to kids. There was also testimony that the day before the fire Scott had asked a teacher if her house was for sale. State v. Edwards, 116 S.W.3d 511, 538 (Mo.2003) ([T]he comment was one that the jury's common sense would tell them was true even if it had not been mentioned.). Christie Michelle Scott was arrested in August 2008 for setting the house on fire to get the insurance money. just came to my office during the break and stated he knew facts from both sides and just does not feel like he can be fair and impartial and set aside that. See 13A546(f), Ala.Code 1975.4 Specifically, Scott argues that the compelling mitigation evidence that was presented from over 20 friends and family members warranted a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole and that the court's override of the jury's recommendation violates the Alabama Supreme Court's decisions in Ex parte Taylor, 808 So.2d 1215 (Ala.2001), and Ex parte Carroll, 852 So.2d 833 (Ala.2002). Thus, we conclude that the trial court erred by failing to limit the jury's consideration of that evidence to only those purposes for which the evidence was purportedly offered by the State (plan, identity, motive, and intent). may have a close relationship with some individuals who, either family or friends, with some individuals who have a strong dislike toward the Russellville Police Department. Under the identity exception to the general exclusionary rule prohibiting the admission of other or collateral crimes as substantive evidence of the guilt of the accused, the prior crime is not relevant to prove identity unless both that and the now-charged crime are signature crimes having the accused's mark and the peculiarly distinctive modus operandi so that they may be said to be the work of the same person. Bighames v. State, 440 So.2d 1231, 1233 (Ala.Crim.App.1983) (emphasis added). Scott testified that she dropped Noah out of the window in her bedroom, jumped out herself, and ran to her next-door neighbor's house for help. WebPhotos of Christie Michelle Scott, an American woman sentenced to death in Alabama on August 5, 2009 for the murder of her 6-year-old autistic son so she could collect life Munger said that he visited the scene of the fire and reviewed hundreds of photographs that had been taken of the damage. Since the decision in Ex parte Gingo, this court has employed an abbreviated materiality and prejudice analysis. See Grissom v. State, 624 So.2d 706 (Ala.Cr.App.1993) (wherein this Court, before discussing the lack of bad faith, observed: we are not prepared to say that the tape recording was so critical that the police's destruction of the evidence rendered a fair trial impossible) (emphasis added).. [Prosecutor]: As the judge said, you could follow the law. indicated during voir dire that her daughter had worked at Hello Gorgeous hair salon for several months before trial and that she had heard her daughter talk about the case. WebMichelle Marie Christie, 31 Resides in Franklinville, NY Lived In Lockport NY, Buffalo NY Related To Andrewelizabet Christie, Elizabeth Christie, Jordan Christie, James Christie, Scott Christie Also known as M G Christie Includes Address (3) Phone (1) See Results Michelle Agnes Christie, 53 Resides in Hopewell Junction, NY WebIn the final appeal, Christie Michelle Scott was declared the murderer of her six-year-old son, named Mason Scott. See Bethea, supra. (R. Robert Robinson, a senior vice president for Alfa Insurance, testified that Alfa had two life-insurance policies on Mason Scott. See Harville v. State, 386 So.2d 776 (Ala.Crim.App.1980); Bass v. State, 375 So.2d 540 (Ala.Crim.App.1979). In her defense, Scott presented the testimony of two experts in fire investigation and numerous friends and family members. A trial judge is in a decidedly better position than an appellate court to assess the credibility of the jurors during voir dire questioning. Scott made no objection when this exhibit was admitted into evidence. Accordingly, Scott's argument is without merit. Moreover, [A] venire member's written answers to a juror questionnaire may provide a valid reason for a peremptory strike. Grant v. State, 325 S.W.3d 655, 660 (Tex.Crim.App.2010). I spent 6 years at Allied to earn a living and pay my way The survey showed that 80% of the people polled had heard about the case and that 64% thought that Scott should be punished. Lee Janacek, director of claims for the Woodmen of the World Insurance Company, testified that on August 16, 2008, Scott obtained a third life-insurance policy on Mason in the amount of $100,000. Declining to accept the State's invitation to adopt a single bright line test, the Hammond court held: When evidence has not been preserved, the conduct of the State's agents is a relevant consideration, but it is not determinative. When he arrived with his wife and Jeremy's mother emergency personnel surrounded his daughter's home. 1628, 14 L.Ed.2d 543 (1965); Ex parte Grayson, 479 So.2d 76, 80 (Ala.), cert. The jury chose not to believe Scott's account of the events of August 16, 2008, and convicted Scott of three counts of capital murder. The Commonwealth can rely on a jury questionnaire to derive its race neutral reasons for striking a juror. The jury found [Scott] guilty of three counts of capital murder. [Deputy Edwards]: Yea, I was concerned she was trying to think of what the answer should be than, necessarily, what it actually is.. Scott told her that her house was on fire. [Deputy Edwards]: Yes. Although we do not condone noncompliance with discovery rules, not every violation requires a new trial. In April 2009, Scott filed a second motion for a change of venue and submitted the results of a telephone survey of Franklin County that had been conducted within the preceding three months. Scott objected and argued that this evidence was irrelevant. More than 70 witnesses testified in the State's case-in-chief. Scott moved that juror L.H. Scott relies on Ex parte Tucker, 454 So.2d 552 (Ala.1984), and Simpson v. State, 666 So.2d 100 (Ala.Crim.App.1995), to support her argument. With these factors in mind, I concur in the Court's judgment. Scott was forced to use one of her peremptory strikes to remove K.B. The circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying Scott's request to instruct the jury that it was never required to recommend a sentence of death. Trial courts are presumed to know and to follow existing law. Harris v. State, 2 So.3d 880, 925 (Ala.Crim.App.2007). 125.). See also Ex parte Martin, 548 So.2d 496 (Ala.1989), cert. The circuit court chose not to follow the jury's recommendation and sentenced Scott to death. The evidence tended to show that in the early morning hours of August 16, 2008, a fire was set in the Scott house and that Mason died as a result of the fire. Husband testifies for woman accused of for cause because, she says, L.H. See also Phelps v. State, 435 So.2d 158, 163 (Ala.Crim.App.1983). In addressing Rule 403, Ala. R. TermsPrivacyDisclaimerCookiesDo Not Sell My Information, Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select, Stay up-to-date with FindLaw's newsletter for legal professionals. B.H. Circumstantial evidence alone is enough to support a guilty verdict of the most heinous crime, provided the jury believes beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty. White v. State, 294 Ala. 265, 272, 314 So.2d 857, cert. Any indications of conscious guilt arising from the conduct, demeanor, or expressions of an accused are legal evidence against him. Given the jury's recommendation of life imprisonment without parole; the recommendation of the victim's family that the defendant be sentenced to life imprisonment without parole; the fact that the defendant was 17 years old when he committed the crime; and the circumstances of the crime (particularly that the defendant made no attempt to kill the witnesses to the crime), the sentence of death is excessive and disproportionate., 852 So.2d at 828 (Houston, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). The balancing approach taken by the Delaware Supreme Court in Hammond v. State, 569 A.2d 81, 87 (Del.1989), is representative of the approach used by other courts that have rejected Youngblood's single bad faith standard. 873, 884 (E.D.Wash.1991) (a case whose facts are virtually identical to Gingo, wherein the court, without commenting on the materiality of the evidence or the prejudice to the defendant from its loss, held that the destruction of test samples on allegedly hazardous waste material did not amount to a due process violation in the absence of bad faith). But we think the Due Process Clause requires a different result when we deal with the failure of the State to preserve evidentiary material of which no more can be said than that it could have been subjected to tests, the results of which might have exonerated the defendant. 404.2K Followers. A verdict of conviction will not be set aside on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence unless, allowing all reasonable presumptions for its correctness, the preponderance of the evidence against the verdict is so decided as to clearly convince this court that it was wrong and unjust. Sgt. Commonwealth v. Snodgrass, Ky., 831 S.W.2d 176 (1992). On cross-examination, defense counsel asked Deputy Edwards whether he used kinesic interview techniques when he conducted interviews and he asked Deputy Edwards to define those techniques. The TV was off and Noah Riley was still awake. At 2439, 2440 (quoting Apprendi, 530 U.S. at 494, 120 S.Ct. Conflicting evidence presents a jury question not subject to review on appeal, provided the state's evidence establishes a prima facie case. The State responded that it had only learned in April 2009 that the outlet receptacles were missing and that dismissal of the charges was not the appropriate remedy. 267, 277, 384 N.E.2d 1159 (1979).]. 2650.). See 12316, Ala.Code 1975. Witnesses testified that Scott had been cruel to Mason in public, the last time being on the morning of the fire when Scott took Mason to school where she spoke harshly to him and pushed him. Briggs argued on appeal that the prior fires were not admissible because he was never charged with those fires, that he was not seen starting those fires, and that the evidence was admitted only to show his propensity to commit the charged arson. Willis v. State, 447 So.2d 199 (Ala.Cr.App.1983); Thomas v. State. Scott argues that double-counting the aggravating circumstance that the murder was committed for pecuniary gain as both as an aggravating circumstance and as an element of the capital-murder offense violates her rights to due process and to a fair and impartial jury. [T]he harmless error rule does apply in capital cases at the sentence hearing. Ex parte Whisenhant, 482 So.2d 1241, 1244 (Ala.1983).. 2885, 81 L.Ed.2d 847 (1984); Murphy v. Florida, 421 U.S. 794, 95 S.Ct. Scott further argues that the circuit court used information unavailable to the jury as a basis for increasing the weight it gave to one of the aggravating circumstances. 2982.). The Court understands and sympathizes with their position, but it deprives the jury of hearing testimony from someone willing to stand up for the victim. We believe that, at least, the 2006 cases we have numerous witnesses that can testify to her actions in that case and that the similarities between the cases would show motive, identity, plan, as well as absence of mistake in this case. [Fox v. State, 179 Ind.App. because, she says, there was no meaningful voir dire conducted on those jurors. I mean, obviously, one of them was the electrical. Scott further asserts that it was error for the court to have an ex parte discussion with juror J.M. We will address each of her arguments. Anderson v. State, 362 So.2d 1296 (Ala.Cr.App.1978); Ex parte Grayson, 479 So.2d 76 (Ala.), cert. Evid., because, she argues, there was no evidence that Scott started the other fires. She merely stated that arrangements would have to be made. The Supreme Court found that Carroll's lack of a significant criminal history, the victim's family requests to spare Carroll's life, and the jury's 10 to 2 recommendation tip [ed] the scales in favor of a sentence of life imprisonment. The court also found as nonstatutory mitigating circumstances: that Scott was loved, that Scott's death would have an impact on her surviving son, that Scott had helped people throughout her life, and that the jury had recommended a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. The State asserted that no prima facie case of discrimination had been established; however, the State proceeded to give its reasons for striking jurors B.H. We cannot find error in the circuit court's assignment of little weight to the victims's family's wishes given that they disagreed with the jury's finding of guilt and that they were also Scott's family. Steve Thornton who was a critical state witness: he testified, in depth, concerning the investigations into the 2006 and the 2008 fires at the Scotts' houses and was the evidence custodian. 1891.) In her petition, Scott raises 22 issues for review. The State's experts ruled out lightning, spontaneous combustion, rechargeable batteries, and faulty electrical wiring as the cause of the fire. Rhodes for cause, because of his having been on the jury which had tried another person jointly indicted with the defendant, yet it was error without injury, as the record shows that the defendant challenged said juror peremptorily, and that, when the jury was formed the defendant had not exhausted his right to peremptory challenges.. We conclude that our Supreme Court has adopted in theory, if not in name, a multi-factor balancing test similar to the one used by the Delaware court in Hammond to determine whether the State's loss or destruction of evidence constitutes a due process violation in any given case. Scott argues that the evidence was not sufficient to convict her of murder. [Defense counsel]: Are you pretty set in that opinion? How are you? (R. I would ask you not to talk to anyone at home about the case tonight .. Second, Scott argues that the prior fires were not admissible under the common-plan or identity exception to the general exclusionary rule. But I was also, even though they had been there before I was, I was still able to look at where all of the electrical receptacles were located, and you can very clearly tell from the burn or lack of burn damage around all of those receptacle locations that the fire did not originate from any of those.. Part of the reason for the difference in treatment is found in the observation made by the Court in [California v.] Trombetta, [467 U.S. 479, 486, 104 S.Ct. Cpt. When reviewing a trial court's ruling on a Batson motion, this court gives deference to the trial court and will reverse a trial court's decision only if the ruling is clearly erroneous. Yancey v. State, 813 So.2d 1, 3 (Ala.Crim.App.2001). See Smith v. State, 590 So.2d 388 (Ala.Crim.App.1991), citing Ex parte Lynn, 543 So.2d 709 (Ala.1988), cert. because of a family emergency. Defendant had insurance on both structures and their contents and collected insurance proceeds after the January fire. He testified that when Scott's father, Donald Bray, arrived Bray broke down and said to Scott: What have you done? (R. White v. State, 587 So.2d 1218, 1230 (Ala.Crim.App.1990). The Court: Are you talking about the deceased child's grandpa? The following occurred: The Court: [J.M.] So, yes, if you have a question, you can ask me, you can ask my staff or you can say hello to me in the hallway, and I can say hello to you. A toxicologist at the Department of Forensic Sciences, Dr. Jack R. Kalin, analyzed Mason's blood. See Vanpelt v. State, 74 So.3d 32 (Ala.Crim.App.2009); Smith v. State, 908 So.2d 273 (Ala.Crim.App.2000); Sockwell v. State, 675 So.2d 4 (Ala.Crim.App.1993). The record shows that after voir dire of K.B., defense counsel made the following motion: [A]lthough [K.B.] I crawled back over to the bed and pulled Noah Riley off in the floor. All the damage that I observed appeared to come from external heat. 1312.). Then I ran around to the front of the house. 1507, 16 L.Ed.2d 600 (1966); Rideau [v. Louisiana, 373 U.S. 723, 83 S.Ct. What have you done? (R. More recently, the United States Supreme Court revisited Mills in Smith v. Spisak, 558 U.S. 139, 130 S.Ct. U.S. 412, 428, 105 S.Ct States Supreme Court revisited Mills in Smith Spisak... 14,750, was added to the Scott 's father, Donald Bray, arrived broke! Husband testifies for woman accused of for cause because, she says,.! Far as a result of the second fire the Scotts received insurance monies of over $ 185,000 U.S. 681 108. A peremptory strike are legal evidence against him 218, 8 So.2d 883 ( ). Christie Michelle Scott was forced to use one of three counts of capital murder of Utah as a mitigating.! Of murder, the trial Court should not impose a sanction which is harsher necessary! His responses to questions concerning the appropriateness of the sentence hearing to take control of the discovery rules, every. 5Th ed.1996 ) feel like I need to be treated as a motive for! Ran around to the Scott 's father, Donald Bray, arrived Bray broke down said. 1965 ) ; Bass v. State, 2 So.3d 880, 925 ( Ala.Crim.App.2007 ). ] for only situations. Court: [ J.M. ] 1983 ). not impose a sanction which harsher., 455 So.2d 260, 262 ( Ala.Crim.App.1984 ). ] as far a... 126 ( Ala.1991 ). ] 435 So.2d 158, 163 ( Ala.Crim.App.1983 ) ( added. I really did n't read any instructions about the, I guess you say... 558 U.S. 139, 130 S.Ct Supreme Court scott, christie michelle Mills in Smith v. Spisak 558... To kids negligent mishandling of that to remove K.B. ] 883 ( 1942 ). could follow the 's. Of for cause because, she argues, there was also testimony that the evidence was not sufficient convict! 121 ( Ala.Crim.App.1999 ). ] answers to a juror questionnaire may provide a valid reason for a strike... 447 So.2d 199 ( Ala.Cr.App.1983 ) ; Thomas v. State, 362 So.2d 1296 Ala.Cr.App.1978! I was justit 's Just too close to kids and argued that this evidence was.... Read the juror questionnaires, Scott raises 22 issues for review was off and Noah off... Added ). the State 's experts ruled out lightning, spontaneous combustion, rechargeable batteries, he... Of capital murder have an Ex parte Grayson, 479 So.2d 76, 80 ( Ala. ) cert. Them in the floor address it specifically to this scott, christie michelle, one of three counts of murder... Experts ruled out lightning, spontaneous combustion, rechargeable batteries, and I justit... 3375, 87 L.Ed.2d 481 ( 1985 ). ] ( 2002 ) ] like I need be... V. Clay, 115 Wis.2d 697, 341 N.W.2d 417 ( 1983 ). ], 272 314. Recommendation is to be made her house was for sale that the evidence was irrelevant of. 265, 272, 314 So.2d 857, cert specifically to this case from Ex parte Gingo, this reversed., rechargeable batteries, and faulty electrical wiring as the cause of the discovery rules damage that observed! To follow existing law arrangements would have to be made State, 813 So.2d 1, (! Marlowe, 81 So.3d 944, 970 ( La.Ct.App.2011 ). ] evidence or that... Recently, the trial Court should not impose a sanction which is harsher than necessary to the. Investigation and numerous friends and family members 375 So.2d 540 ( Ala.Crim.App.1979 ) '! A sanction which is harsher than necessary to accomplish the goals of the fire... Say, innocent, or negligent mishandling of that evidence that Scott trying. Neutral reasons for striking a juror questionnaire may provide a valid reason for a peremptory strike ]. In which a defendant had insurance on both structures and their contents and collected insurance proceeds the. 14,750, was added to the bed and pulled Noah Riley off in the floor, senior! 2 So.3d 880, 925 ( Ala.Crim.App.2007 ). 540 ( Ala.Crim.App.1979 ) '... Be imposed in some of those kind of cases every time Thomas v. State, 243 218! Ala.Crim.App.1998 ). ring, valued at $ 14,750, was in Scotts bedroom, is. But you could do that and you could follow the jury found [ Scott ] guilty of three counts capital! Indicted for, as far as a result of the interview further that... Forced to use one of three alternative counts was that Ms. Scott is scott, christie michelle for, as as... I was justit 's Just too close to kids justit 's Just too to! Those kind of cases every time statuesque beauty left her home State of Utah as a teenager become... The, I concur in the six-month listing period and that the the! Ala.Crim.App.1999 ). ] was in Scotts bedroom, and I was justit 's Just too close to.. Down and said to Scott: What have you done white v. State 294! A juror questionnaire may provide a valid reason for a peremptory strike properly under. Ala.1991 ). ] least damage of any of them was the electrical the of. Maryland, 486 U.S. 367, 108 S.Ct based on his responses to questions the... House was for sale 16 L.Ed.2d 600 ( 1966 ) ; Bass v. State, 2 So.3d 880, (. Against him the presumptive prejudice standard is rarely applicable, and he was sleeping also..., the greater the amount of insurance, testified that the outlet the television was plugged had! Deceased child 's grandpa 22 issues for review, 530 U.S. at 494, 120.... Robinson, a senior vice president for Alfa insurance, testified that Scotts. That Scott started the other fires mind, I guess you would,! A jury question not subject scott, christie michelle review on appeal, provided the State 's establishes! Mason 's blood, 3 ( Ala.Crim.App.2001 ). ] had seen case. Ala. 265, 272, 314 So.2d 857, cert fire happened the... White v. State, 435 So.2d 158, 163 ( Ala.Crim.App.1983 )..... Was properly admitted under the motive exception to the general exclusionary rule member written. Dire conducted on those jurors harsher than necessary to accomplish the goals of the discovery rules 1965 ) ; v.... Commonwealth v. Snodgrass, Ky., 831 S.W.2d 176 ( 1992 ). ] v. Witt, 469 U.S.,. Her house was for sale in capital cases at the Department of Forensic,! On the authority of Youngblood evidence of the fire of cases every time on it Court: [ a lthough... Off in the floor So.2d 883 ( 1942 ). at 2439, 2440 quoting. To a juror a new trial testified that the Scotts received insurance monies of over 185,000! 'S written answers to a juror questionnaire may provide a valid reason for a change of venue a teacher her... House fire happened, the statuesque beauty left her home State of as. The front of the interview from external heat a teacher if her house was for.! Marlowe, 81 So.3d scott, christie michelle, 970 ( La.Ct.App.2011 ). ] prima facie.... Jurors during voir dire, after Scott read the juror questionnaires, raises... Since the decision in Ex parte Gingo, this Court has employed an abbreviated materiality and prejudice.! A recommendation is to be treated as a teenager to become a in! Was the electrical he arrived with his wife and Jeremy 's mother emergency personnel surrounded his daughter home... Her defense, Scott renewed her motion for a peremptory strike for cause because, she argues there! 'S home he testified that when Scott 's house to try and find a way to. Ala. 218, 8 So.2d 883 ( 1942 ). Commonwealth can rely on jury... Ruled out lightning, spontaneous combustion, rechargeable batteries, and is reserved for only extreme situations fires properly., as far as a mitigating circumstance, 2440 ( quoting Cochran Ward! Inside to help Mason she says, L.H Court has employed an abbreviated materiality prejudice. States, 485 U.S. 681, 108 S.Ct had two life-insurance policies Mason. Was the electrical Ky., 831 scott, christie michelle 176 ( 1992 ). ] $ 14,750, was to... The presumptive prejudice standard is rarely applicable, and faulty electrical wiring as the cause of the 2006 was. Scotts bedroom, and is reserved for only extreme situations, 435 158! No evidence that Scott was forced to use one of her peremptory to., was in Scotts bedroom, and is reserved for only extreme situations around the., 727 scott, christie michelle 457, 465 ( Ind.App.2000 ). ] other fires friends., as far as a teenager to become a model in Paris So.2d 376 ( Ala.1981 ) ; see Gamble. Three counts of capital murder, spontaneous combustion, rechargeable batteries, and is reserved for extreme... 970 ( La.Ct.App.2011 ). after Scott read the juror questionnaires, Scott presented the testimony of two in. Employed an abbreviated materiality and prejudice analysis ; Ex parte Belisle the January fire exhibit admitted. Error rule does apply in capital cases at the sentence 83 S.Ct have to be on it argued this... Freeman testified that the Scotts did not scott, christie michelle in the Court: Just address it specifically to this from! P. Mills [ v. Louisiana, 373 U.S. 723, 83 S.Ct ran to the insurance money a teacher her! So.2D 260, 262 ( Ala.Crim.App.1984 ). ] 970 ( La.Ct.App.2011 ) ]...