"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. He did not break 510, 130 pound Wesley Crandall's neck. Contact us. In the end, an impermissible flood of damaging propensity evidence washed away Thompson's right to a fair trial. One of the defendants had killed the possessor of the car (who apparently had stolen the vehicle himself) before the car was driven from Indiana to Illinois. Mr. Thompson was ultimately convicted of the murder of Wesley Crandall in February of 1991. Most seriously, the information, witness list, and verdict form from the Crandall murder trial were admitted into evidence. 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. [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." Indeed, the prohibition on use of prior misconduct to prove a criminal charge is "a basic tenet of criminal evidence law older than the republic itself . We cannot conclude that these evidentiary errors were harmless. Rather, he chose to attack Percy's credibility. Rather than telling the jury to disregard the disputed evidence completely because it was not admissible for any purpose, the limiting instruction here instructed the jury to limit its consideration of prior acts to identity. For this reason, it has long been established that prospective jurors are not to know of prior convictions until the penalty phase. 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. In April 1991, Thompson destroyed all the guns taken from Crandall except the handgun, a second gun also admitted in evidence, and a ".22 derringer" that was sold to a third party. The email address cannot be subscribed. Jerry as Percy Frank's Father as Toby Bart (from The Simpsons) as Duck Carl (from The Simpsons) as Donald Lenny (from The Simpsons) as Douglas Milhouse (from The Simpsons) as Oliver Nelson (from The Simpsons) as Diesel Skipper (from Skipper & Skeeto) as Skarloey Skeeto (from Skipper & Skeeto) as Rheneas Rather, he chose to attack Percy's credibility. 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. 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. Jerry Don Thompson - President - Voyager Energy Services - LinkedIn Jerry K. Thompson v. State of Indiana :: 1998 - Justia Law The State's contention that the extra details of the Crandall murder helped prove identity is unpersuasive. It is always difficult saying goodbye to someone we love and cherish. The list of "other purposes" in the Rule is not exhaustive; extrinsic act evidence may be admitted for any purpose not specified in Rule 404(b) unless precluded by, the first sentence of Rule 404(b) or any other Rule. Join Facebook to connect with Jerry Thompson and others you may know. See, e.g., United States v. Currier, 821 F.2d 52 (1st Cir.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). 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. 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. 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. BOEHM, Justice. I join fully in the majority opinion, but write separately to make an observation pertinent to the second trial. You can send your sympathy in the guestbook provided and share it with the . Who does [the State] say was with Jerry Thompson on March 14th of 1991, at Hillis Auto Sales? 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. In this review, we do not reweigh evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses. They have also lived in Phippsburg, ME and Beverly, MA. 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. If so, the jury necessarily learns of the aggravating circumstance in the course of the guilt phase. The jury therefore knew from the outset that Thompson had been a killer and a thief in the past. 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. Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784, 89 S.Ct. That charge was eventually dismissed in exchange for Percy's testifying about the deaths of Hillis and Beeler. 1983, trial court committed reversible error by informing jury sua sponte during voir dire of inmate's prior convictions for rape and sexual assault). See Part I supra. 1993). I. 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. As Percy waited nearby in the living room, Thompson and Crandall spoke in the kitchen. I don't think a signature, in quotes, is a required. Lockhart v. State, 609 N.E.2d 1093, 1097 (Ind.1993). The relevance and balancing issues are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Is proof of that conviction in New Castle, proof of his guilt in this case? Also known as Jerry Gthompson. According to Percy, on the day of the killings, he and Thompson went to Hillis Auto Sales where, without any forewarning, Thompson shot both victims and Thompson and Percy robbed them. When this mandate is observed, the conviction will not be disturbed. Despite Thompson's actions linking the separate events, the jury was impermissibly left with the reverberating clang of the Crandall murder ringing in its ears, United States v. Merriweather, 78 F.3d 1070, 1077 (6th Cir.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. 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. B. 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. The charging information, witness list, and verdict form from Henry County were admitted into evidence at that point. In June 1991, defendant Jerry Thompson and Douglas Percy were driving through Illinois and were stopped for a traffic violation. 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). 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. In and of itself, no. at 321, were unfairly prejudicial and required a new trial. at 368, 417 N.E.2d at 906. 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. In June 1991, defendant Jerry Thompson and Douglas Percy were driving through Illinois and were stopped for a traffic violation. 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. On March 14, 1991, Melvin Hillis and Robert Beeler were shot to death at Hillis Auto Sales in Indianapolis. 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. Jerry Thompson in Portland, OR - Address & Phone Number - Whitepages at 367, 417 N.E.2d at 906. Select this result to view Jerry Wayne Thompson's phone number, address, and more. The defense asked jurors to think about what somebody's got to gain when they testify. Ct. App. 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). 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. She testified that in December 1990 she sold Crandall a handgun similar to the alleged murder weapon in this case. 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. 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. Wesley Crandall was a small time marihuana dealer; they went there in a pick-up truck, and Jerry Thompson took his shotgun along. 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. 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. The well established rationale behind Evidence Rule 404(b) is that the jury is precluded from making the forbidden inference that the defendant had a criminal propensity and therefore engaged in the charged conduct. As noted, the extraneous Crandall murder evidence was not admissible for this purpose. . 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. 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. 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. Indeed, by the time of closing argument, the State referred to the discrete killings as a circle of criminal conduct for which Thompson should be held responsible. Bill Percy Bill Percy Partner Thompson Dorfman Sweatman LLP 201 Portage Avenue Suite 2200 Winnipeg, MB R3B 3L3 PH: 204.934.2455 FX: 204.934.. collaborativepracticemanitoba.ca Lawyers - Our People | TDS Law The relevance and balancing issues are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. 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. 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. Ct. App. Percy carried Thompson's sawed-off shotgun into the residence. It is valid as a logical proposition only if one has an understanding of all the dynamics of the Crandall trial. Jerry shot the drug dealer with a shotgun, execution style. 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. Thompson retrieved a pillow from another room, placed it over Crandall's head, and fired. THOMPSON SUFFERED SEVERAL FATAL STAB WOUNDS. The pathologist opined that Crandall died from a gunshot wound to the head. Sometime after that 2 retarded men were coerced into admitting that they killed Wesley Crandall, were convicted; they went to prison, and but, for Doug Percy coming forward, they would probably still be there. Jerry Thompson Obituary. 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. Thompson was charged and a jury convicted him on all counts. The trial court ruled that the State would be allowed to simply explain presence and then cut it off and let's get on., Percy gave the following account. This cause is remanded for a new trial. United States v. York, 933 F.2d 1343, 1353-54 (7th Cir. Under these circumstances, the errors were not harmless.See footnote 11 See Wickizer v. State, 626 N.E.2d 795, 800-01 (Ind. 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 identity exception to the general prohibition on propensity evidence is crafted primarily for "signature" crimes with a common modus operandi. These criteria mirror Evidence Rules 401, 402, 403, and 404(b). This occurred with the apparent assent of all counsel. In the next few weeks, Thompson used Percy's garage to grind the serial numbers off the weapons taken from Crandall's residence. Douglas is related to Greg S Percy and Theresa Marie Percy as well as 1 additional person. 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. Ind.Code 35-42-1-1(1) (Supp.1989). 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. He didn't stomp on him; he didn't take a shotgun and nearly blow his head off. Evidence of Prior Uncharged Misconduct 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. 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. 13. And, he took Wesley Crandall's guns. The prosecutor referred not only to Percy's allegations, but also to their validation in the form of Thompson's murder conviction. See, e.g., Swain v. State, 647 N.E.2d 23 (Ind. 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. [T]he Evidence shows that [Percy] did nothing to kill either of those 3 men. [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. We first examine what went on in the trial court. That's what identifies him with being associated with that gun. Mar 3, 2022 Mar 3, 2022; Facebook; Twitter; WhatsApp; SMS; . It cannot be expected to make its decision in a void United States v. Moore, 735 F.2d 289, 292 (8th Cir.1984). it is necessary that the information of prior, crimes be withheld from the jury until the instant case is decided." 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. . 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." Percy testified that Thompson shot Crandall. Moreover, the State emphasized the prior misconduct in its opening statement, during the case in chief, and again in its closing argument. Lockhart v. State, 609 N.E.2d 1093, 1097 (Ind. These authorities, e.g., Maldonado v. State, 265 Ind. at 368, 417 N.E.2d at 906. Evans, 563 N.E.2d at 1259. . ." On cross-examination, the defense did not directly challenge Percy's account of what happened in New Castle. Cf. That is not the end of the analysis, however. He didn't stomp on him; he didn't take a shotgun and nearly blow his head off. Prospective jurors were told the following: Jerry K. Thompson has been convicted of another Murder; that is, a judgment of conviction for the murder of Wesley A. Crandall, Junior, was entered against Jerry K. Thompson on the 15th day of June, 1993, in Henry County, Indiana, in cause #33D019207CF027 The three other aggravating circumstances were: (1) two counts of committing an intentional killing while committing or attempting to commit a robbery, Ind.Code 35-50-2-9(b)(1) (Supp.1990); and (2) one count of committing another murder at any time, Ind.Code 35-50-2-9(b)(8) (Supp.1990). Thompson's access to the gun was an important piece of circumstantial proof increasing the likelihood that he was the killer (or at least not excluding that possibility). 2. In June 1991, defendant Jerry Thompson and Douglas Percy were driving through Illinois and were stopped for a traffic violation. Even oblique or apparently innocuous references to prior convictions are impermissible. Cf. The admissibility of the Crandall murder evidence was contested from the outset. He offers broad experience in skills like . Citing several cases, the State nonetheless urges a more expansive view of the identity exception to include evidence of prior crimes in which an instrumentality used in the current crime was acquired. Leonard v. United States, 378 U.S. 544, 84 S.Ct. A. Pretrial developments The admissibility of the Crandall murder evidence was contested from the outset. We have little difficulty concluding that the fact and manner of Crandall's death, and Thompson's murder conviction, were highly prejudicial to Thompson. Wesley Crandall was a small time marihuana dealer; they went there in a pick-up truck, and Jerry Thompson took his shotgun along. Without that knowledge it is impossible to conclude what, if any, validation of Percy the conviction represents. 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. Douglas Percy. 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. There is nothing in the record indicating on what basis it was admitted into evidence over Thompson's objection. 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.Code 35-50-2-9(b)(1) (Supp.1990). Rule 403 required exclusion More importantly, evidence of a prior conviction is as prejudicial as evidence can get, and requires a strong showing of probative value. Percy Douglas Thompson was born circa 1889, to Henry Maxwell Thompson and Jannet Isabella Watson. 1974), the defendants were charged with concealing a stolen car and moving it in interstate commerce. 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 .