Loveless v. State, 240 Ind. at 367, 417 N.E.2d at 906. Percy gave the following account. It cannot be expected to make its decision in a void United States v. Moore, 735 F.2d 289, 292 (8th Cir.1984). 2d 265 (1988). at 367, 417 N.E.2d at 906. Jerry Thompson (8,289 matches): Phone Number, Email, Address - Spokeo THOMPSON SUFFERED SEVERAL FATAL STAB WOUNDS. Champlain v. State, 681 N.E.2d 696, 702 (Ind. However, the details of the killing, including the cause of death as being two gunshot wounds in the head, id. Percy did not see the location of the shot, but assumed that Thompson had shot Crandall in the head. United States v. York, 933 F.2d 1343, 1353-54 (7th Cir. See also Swanson v. State, 666 N.E.2d 397 (Ind.1996) (although common-law doctrine of res gestae did not survive enactment of Indiana Rules of Evidence, facts that are part of the story of the crime are admissible if relevant within the meaning of Evidence Rule 401). Although this testimony was admitted only to show that the gun had been in Thompson's possession before the crimes in this case, the State was allowed to elicit significant details of the prior murder and to establish that Thompson was convicted for it. . 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. 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. First Female Commander of Marine One Fired After Assault Charge 4. As Brewer put it, in the latter situation [t]he killing and the robbery were the same res. Brewer, 275 Ind. The State's fallback position, advanced at oral argument in this Court, is that all evidence related to the Crandall murder was properly admitted because Percy's credibility was under attack. One thing was certain, by the time he reached manhood, Jerry Thompson was a savage killer. The State's claim that any prejudice to Thompson was cured by a limiting instruction is unpersuasive. 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. Id. 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. Lockhart v. State, 609 N.E.2d 1093, 1097 (Ind.1993). Once he got his hands on a gun, any target would do. Thompson was charged and a jury convicted him on all counts. 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. Moreover, the State emphasized the prior misconduct in its opening statement, during the case in chief, and again in its closing argument. at 368, 417 N.E.2d at 906. 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. 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." Ultimately this case turns on whether the jury's exposure to the Crandall incident exceeded permissible bounds. The identity exception to the general prohibition on propensity evidence is crafted primarily for "signature" crimes with a common modus operandi. This cause is remanded for a new trial. 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. Percy is much taller then any student at Doug's school. However, the jury's apparent decision to believe Percy may have turned on the wrongly admitted evidence. Id. Percy did not see the location of the shot, but assumed that Thompson had shot Crandall in the head. Leonard v. United States, 378 U.S. 544, 84 S. Ct. 1696, 12 L. Ed. 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. 49G03-9204-CF-60651, I join fully in the majority opinion, but write separately to make an observation pertinent to the second trial. On February 14, 1991, one month before the murders in this case, Wesley Crandall Jr. was shot to death in his home in New Castle, Indiana. In any event, the jury in this case did not and could not know all of the record in the Crandall trial. After testifying as to the Indianapolis victims, he also testified that Crandall had died of a gunshot wound to the head. Lannan, 600 N.E.2d at 1338. Join Facebook to connect with Jerry Thompson and others you may know. See, e.g., Heavrin v. State, 675 N.E.2d 1075, 1083 (Ind. Please try again. See, e.g., Swain v. State, 647 N.E.2d 23 (Ind.Ct.App.1995) (evidence as to defendant's four prior convictions for dealing in cocaine should not have been admitted in prosecution for cocaine possession), trans. Stay up-to-date with how the law affects your life. 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 jury's verdict reflects a decision to credit Percy's testimony that this Court, as an appellate tribunal, would ordinarily not question. 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. 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. 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. When Featheringill was asked about the events in New Castle, the defense objected on hearsay grounds. In a hearing outside the presence of the jury, the State asserted that proof of the conviction was relevant to show identity and because Percy's credibility had been attacked. He appeals. In this review, we do not reweigh evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses. View the profiles of people named Jerry Thompson. Two witnesses-the forensic pathologist and Percy's friend Mike Featheringill-testified to how Crandall died. Percy did not testify that Crandall was killed in his presence, only that he assumed Thompson shot him in the head. Thompson and Percy had the first two guns with them when they were detained by Illinois police in June 1991.7. He didn't stomp on him; he didn't take a shotgun and nearly blow his head off. Such evidence is highly prejudicial." Bone.. Looks. at 321, were unfairly prejudicial and required a new trial. In February of 1991, [Thompson and Percy] went to New Castle, Indiana, to meet a man by the name of Wesley Crandall. Id. 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. Conviction there could have been based on forensic or other evidence wholly independent of Percy's testimony. 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. In closing, the State described the undoing of the apparently wrongful conviction of the two men as the beginning of a circle of justice that could be closed if the jury returned with a conviction in this case. Because a conviction in a capital case may be based upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice, Lowery v. State, 547 N.E.2d 1046, 1053 (Ind.1989) (citation omitted), the Double Jeopardy Clause does not preclude a retrial. Join Facebook to connect with Jerry Thompson and others you may know. SHEPARD, C.J., concurs with separate opinion. 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. See, e.g., United States v. Currier, 821 F.2d 52 (1st Cir. 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. These authorities, e.g., Maldonado v. State, 265 Ind. Id. However, the details of the killing, including the cause of death "as being two gunshot wounds in the head," id. Evidence of Prior Uncharged Misconduct. 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. 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. Ind.Evidence Rule 103(a) (reversible error not established unless a substantial right of the party is affected). I don't think a signature, in quotes, is a required. AT THE TIME, THOMPSON WAS ON DIRECT APPEAL FROM HIS DEATH SENTENCE FOLLOWING A RETRIAL IN MARION COUNTY. 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. 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. Under these circumstances, the errors were not harmless.See footnote 11 See Wickizer v. State, 626 N.E.2d 795, 800-01 (Ind. Learn more about FindLaws newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. 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. Doug's military training took place in Hastings. Thompson filed a motion in limine before trial objecting to the admission of any evidence related to Crandall's death, including the fact of Thompson's conviction for that murder. See, e.g., Watson v. State, 540 N.E.2d 598 (Ind. As noted, the extraneous Crandall murder evidence was not admissible for this purpose. . The proffered conviction here does not approach the probative value required to outweigh that prejudice under Rule 403. The propensity evidence in this case crossed that line by a wide margin. This Court has jurisdiction under Indiana Appellate Rule 4(A)(7). Bowen v. State, 680 N.E.2d 536, 540 (Ind.1997) (improper comments about defendant's criminal background did not require reversal because evidence independently supported conviction for burglary); United States v. Burke, 948 F.2d 23, 28 (1st Cir.1991) (erroneous admission of extrinsic acts was harmless because there was strong properly admitted evidence of guilt and prosecutor did not embellish upon the incident). 6. 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. 10+ "Doug Percy" profiles | LinkedIn Cf. In March 1992, Percy approached Indianapolis police with what he claimed was information about Thompson's involvement in the killings. Jerry Thompson in Portland, OR - Address & Phone Number - Whitepages 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). These authorities, e.g., Maldonado v. State, 265 Ind. These criteria mirror Evidence Rules 401, 402, 403, and 404(b). 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. 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.