After allowing the Defendant to approach the bench prior to the testimony of Dr. Cleland Blake, April Ward, Jimmy Lynn Huskey, and Lettie Marie Cruze, when the State called witness Robert Yoakum, and defense counsel again approached the bench, the trial court refused to continue to "pre-review" the testimony, told defense counsel to object to questions as they were asked, and promised that it would then rule on the objections. The trial judge did not abuse his discretion by completing April Ward's testimony that afternoon. Based on this evidence, presented over four days of trial, the jury found the Defendant not guilty of felony-murder, robbery, and larceny, but guilty of premeditated first-degree murder, first-degree burglary, and assault with intent to commit rape. Caughron said that he stayed at his grandmother's house on the night of the killing and had been riding around with a friend and his wife at the time of the murder. After drinking the blood, April said, she went to the bathroom to throw up, but did not. Gary Caughron - Historical records and family trees - MyHeritage Jerry Springer longtime syndicated talk-show host and former Cincinnati mayor died Thursday at his home in the suburbs of Chicago. The court in the present case, however, was unusually active in directing the form that questioning should take. 3500 (1957), passed in response to the United States Supreme Court's opinion in Jencks v. United States, 353 U.S. 657, 77 S. Ct. 1007, 1 L. Ed. For there can be no dispute, given the facts of this case, that the error committed by the trial court was prejudicial. Allowing the recall of a witness is left to the sound discretion of the trial judge, whose decision will only be disturbed upon a showing of abuse of discretion. Gary is related to Gitta E Caughron and Marsha A Caughron. After looking at a newspaper article mentioning the homicide, the Defendant told Haynes that he thought his girlfriend was "snitching" on him. Defense counsel then argued that he should be allowed to read Phillips' previous statements into evidence because Phillips was "unavailable" under T.R.E. We find no reversible error in the court's conduct during McFadden's testimony. The phone numbers associated with Judy: (478) 923-6928 (Bellsouth Telecommunications, LLC), (478) 284-7727 (Sprint Spectrum LPBellsouth Telecommunications, LLC). App. This advance production satisfied the State's duty under Rule 26.2 and avoided the needless delay of the trial. 804. He told McGaha that he had been drunk and partying the night of the murder. When it became apparent that Dedrick would not be at trial, defense counsel expressly stated he did not want a continuance because of the stipulation. 1983). Gary was born in Nevada, Mo., on Oct. 11, 1963, to Robert and Elizabeth (Wolf) Caughron. Top recordings of the year were Tommy Dorsey's "I'll Never Smile Again" (vocal Frank Sinatra) - 12 weeks at the top, Bing Crosby's "Only Forever" - 9 weeks at the top, and Artie Shaw's "Frenesi" - 12 weeks at the top. [2] So long as a witness is of sufficient capacity to understand the obligation of an oath or affirmation, and some rule or statute does not provide otherwise, the witness is competent. 264, 195 So. See Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 154, 92 S. Ct. 763, 766, 31 L. Ed. In Ingraldi, by failing to move for a continuance and then thoroughly cross-examining the witness, the defense counsel cured a potential Brady violation. Dellinger v. United States, 474 U.S. 1005, 106 S. Ct. 524, 88 L. Ed. Accord, United States v. Winner, 666 F.2d 447, 448-449 (10th Cir.1981); United States v. Knowles, 594 F.2d 753, 755 (9th Cir.1979); United States v. Aaron, 457 F.2d 865, 869 (2nd Cir.1972). These statements certainly would not support a murder conviction in the absence of April Ward's testimony. Shelby Caughron (1940 - 1986) - Dandridge, Tennessee He called the victim a "bitch." Finally, in United States v. Moceri, 359 F. Supp. At 4:05 p.m. the next day, shortly before the conclusion of the direct examination of April Ward, counsel for Defendant asked the court to allow him to start his cross-examination the next morning. They used to work at Ruidoso Residential Properties. For example, in Clancy v. United States, 365 U.S. 312, 81 S. Ct. 645, 5 L. Ed. He apologized to the trial judge for having to ask for a recess, and indicated that the defense had tried to avoid the delay by seeking pretrial discovery of the witnesses' statements, an effort that had proved unsuccessful. Join Facebook to connect with Gary Caughron and others you may know. See Baxter v. State, 503 S.W.2d 226, 230 (Tenn. Crim. The progenitor of Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 26.2 is the 1957 decision of the United States Supreme Court in Jencks v. United States, 77 S. Ct. 1007, 353 U.S. 657, 1 L. Ed. However, the Tennessee rule applies to all pretrial motions under Rule 12(b). 2d 481 (1985). Children . Unable to complete the sex act with Jones, the Defendant suggested sex with April. The verdict and judgment are supported by material evidence, and the sentence of death is in no way arbitrary or disproportionate. 875 S.W.2d 253 (1994) | Cited 9 times . In early summer 1987, according to April, she and the 27-year-old Defendant met and became romantically involved. State v. Melson, 638 S.W.2d 342, 359 (Tenn. 1982). Although the trial court told defense counsel that he could explore this situation "later at a proper time," counsel never did so. They have also lived in Decatur, IL. 2d 215 (1963), governing the right to pretrial discovery of exculpatory evidence material to the issue of the defendant's guilt, discussed further in Section II, infra. Gary June Caughron v. State of Tennessee - CourtListener.com Gary June Caughron v. State of Tennessee, 03C01-9707-CC-00301 (Tenn. Crim. Shortly before trial, the Defendant moved for a continuance on four grounds: (1) to take the testimony or deposition of George Tippens, an investigating officer who had moved to Florida; (2) to investigate additional suspects in the case whose names had been supplied to the defense on January 19, 1990; (3) to examine the door to the victim's bedroom; and (4) to permit FBI Agent Doug Dedrick to testify. The record shows that juror Jerry McGill was related to State's witness John Brown by marriage. Nevertheless, the trial judge not only forced defense counsel to begin his cross-examination of April Ward at that late hour, but he also failed to recess until cross-examination was completed, some considerable period of time later that evening. The prosecution did, however, insist that she be kept at home and then took advantage of her vulnerability and fear of punishment by advising her mother not to let April discuss the case with the defendant's attorneys. 1986), a court ordered the witnesses to submit to depositions in order to cure the problem. See, e.g., Freeman v. State of *546 Georgia, 599 F.2d 65, 69 (5th Cir.1979), cert. 1980). The material consisted of "a stack of paper at least eight inches thick, including a thousand pages of testimony obtained from ten witnesses, a forty-five minute tape recording and other documents." See, e.g., United States v. Polisi, 416 F.2d 573 (2d Cir.1969); United States v. Shaffer, 789 F.2d 682, 689 (9th Cir.1986). It must be clearly shown that a trial court has abused its discretion in refusing to grant a continuance before that decision will be disturbed on appeal. Supreme Court of Tennessee, at Knoxville. Moreover, it has been held that the failure of an attorney to seek a recess for the purpose of reviewing recently proffered Jencks material (instead the defense attorney tried to read through the documents while direct examination was in progress) constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel, yet another Sixth Amendment deprivation. He was 79. The Tennessean from Nashville, Tennessee Page 40 The reviewing court found an abuse of discretion amounting to a violation of the defendants' rights under the Jencks Act and ordered a new trial. He also objects to Cruze's testimony that the Defendant "sneaked around" her house for some period of time after the murder. It is axiomatic that a trial judge should exercise care not to express any thought that might lead the jury to infer that the judge is in favor of or against the defendant in a criminal trial. He also told McGaha he had lost a ring. 16(a)(1)(A). These were objections ordinarily made when and if the potentially objectionable testimony occurred. This upset Caughron, who told April Ward that he would like to catch Ann Jones "out one night" and "slice her throat." In Dr. Pareau's opinion, Caughron had received inadequate parenting, and there had been no consistency in his relationships. Her skull had been fractured and the cartilage in her nose displaced by the beating. There is no merit to Defendant's assertion that the trial court's actions drew undue attention to this part of the charge. 1971). Edward Moore, the jailer at the Sevier County Jail, testified that he had never had any "real problems" from Defendant while he had been in jail. Michael Caughron currently lives in Port Lavaca, TX; in the past Michael has also lived in Charleston SC. The Defendant, Gary June Caughron, appeals directly to this Court his conviction of first degree premeditated murder and the sentence of death imposed by the jury, and his convictions of first degree burglary, and assault with intent to commit rape. We find no error with regard to the trial court's refusal to instruct the jurors that they should presume that the sentence they assess will actually be carried out that if a life sentence is imposed, a life sentence will be served and, likewise, that if the death penalty is assessed, the Defendant will be executed. It is clear from the record that the trial court's decision to deny a recess was not due to any misunderstanding on his part about the crucial nature of April Ward's testimony. Leadership role overseeing approximately 40 technicians in a fast paced environment. Defense counsel was in effect asking the court as a regular practice, to speculate on the admissibility of evidence, without any idea of the context in which the evidence would be presented. The Gregory court, therefore, found that the state had prejudiced the defendant's pre-trial preparation and thereby deprived him of a fair trial. Second, despite the trial court's assessment of the statements in question as "not that complex," "not that different" from one another, and containing "nothing worthwhile, relevant or germane," a review of April Ward's statements demonstrates clearly that they were a powerful source of ammunition with which to impeach her testimony, had defense counsel been permitted the time necessary to review them and prepare his cross-examination in light of their content. The defense sought to show that, despite a thorough and meticulous investigation, there was absolutely no evidence connecting Defendant with the crime scene. ." The crucial evidence Defendant alleged Tippens possessed was his knowledge that there were groceries in the victim's truck when the body was discovered. STATE of Tennessee, Appellee, Knoxville, Tennessee. Moreover, appellate judges are in a poor position to second-guess counsel on the question of whether a recess to permit full utilization of the statements in this case would have been efficacious. During *540 cross-examination of April Ward, when defense counsel asked Ward why she had lied to law enforcement officers regarding whom she had told about the crime, a juror whispered loudly, "What's the difference?" Building on its ruling in Clancy, the United States Supreme Court noted in Goldberg v. United States: 425 U.S. 94, 111, note 21, 96 S. Ct. 1338, 1348, note 21, 47 L. Ed. Similar beating of a victim was held to support a finding of aggravating circumstance (i)(5) in State v. Barber, 753 S.W.2d 659, 668 (Tenn. 1988); State v. McNish, 727 S.W.2d 490, 494 (Tenn. 1987); and State v. Cone, 665 S.W.2d 87, 94-95 (Tenn. 1984). After a recess, during which the jury went to lunch, the judge informed counsel that after reflection he had concluded that he should change the charge to conform more to the language of T.C.A. 2d 1304 (1959): Thus, federal law permits the courts to overlook Jencks violations only in the narrowest of circumstances:[7]. *529 Charles W. Burson, Atty. To contact Judy, send them an email at judy.caughron@aol.com We do not find that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to grant Defendant's motion for a continuance. The court was also requested to have copies of all these files sealed and filed for any appeal. CAUGHRON, ROY W. - age 54, of Sevierville, passed away Friday, January 11, 2013. denied sub nom. App. Furthermore, there was no reversible error, if any, in failing to sustain the Defendant's objections since prejudice is not clearly shown. For example, in Kines v. Butterworth, 669 F.2d 6 (1st Cir.1981), cert. If the issue is not considered waived, there is no indication in the record and no reason to believe that the jurors who remained were prejudiced against the Defendant by the juror's remark, which was a comment upon counsel's repetitive questioning not upon the merits of the case. Answering this inquiry in the affirmative, the majority postulates that because the defense "team" was given a copy of April's six statements "for overnight study and reflection," defense counsel had 22 hours in which to "study and reflect" on those 64 pages. 5249 HIGHWAY 67 WEST MOUNTAIN CITY, TN 37683. The proof shows that while Jones was alive and conscious, see State v. Williams, supra, 690 S.W.2d at 529-530, the Defendant told her that she was going to die as she begged for her life. denied, 456 U.S. 980, 102 S. Ct. 2250, 72 L. Ed. Hence, both the due process violation by police in directing April Ward's mother not to let her talk to defense counsel, and the extenuation of that due process violation by the prosecutor in wrongfully withholding Brady material, could have been overcome in this case, had the trial court given defense counsel an adequate opportunity to review that material at an appropriate point during the trial. 2d 641 (1980); Lockett v. Blackburn, 571 F.2d 309, 313 (5th Cir. Defense counsel then requested that the court also tell the jury that it had not changed the instruction simply to draw attention to that factor. While the defendant's lead attorney did cross-examine April Ward at trial, there is no way to measure how much more vigorous and effective his cross-examination might have been if he had been able to interview the witness in person prior to trial, or had been furnished with her prior inconsistent statements in response to his timely discovery motion, or had been given an adequate opportunity to review those statements and use them to prepare an effective cross-examination following her testimony on direct examination, all of which he was entitled to do under state and federal law and under our rules of procedure. App. To use a colloquialism that summarizes the situation most descriptively, Caughron's attorneys were effectively "stone-walled" by state officials involved in the investigation and prosecution of this case. The Defendant gave April a survival knife. MG100 Coach. This was about 40% of all the recorded Caughron's in USA. Pique v. State, supra, 480 S.W.2d at 550-551. 2d 1103 (1957). There was, in short, no violation of Rule 26.2 and thus no error, in the majority's view. It did not provide for the production of statements by witnesses under any circumstances. App. 2255"). 1981). Then, on June 22, 1988, they took the first of six statements they would obtain from April Ward. The Defendant next argues that Dr. Blake was not qualified to characterize the injuries on the victim's back as "whipping marks" and those on her buttock as a slap injury. Id. He is the linchpin of the prosecution's case." 2d 856 (1982), a state trooper instructed three witnesses, the correctional *547 officers present after a prison assault, not to discuss the case with the defense attorney. denied, 459 U.S. 1137, 103 S. Ct. 770, 74 L. Ed. Nevertheless, if defense counsel had been given an opportunity to make effective use of the material, that is, time to review those contradictory statements and time to prepare for April Ward's cross-examination based on what was contained in those statements, the due process problem in this case might have been avoided. D. Paine, Tennessee Law of Evidence, 103.3 (2d ed. Jones's legs and arms had been bound and tied to the bed with strips of blue terry cloth and pieces of sheer, off-white material like that used for table cloths and curtains. When the time came for Phillips to testify, he refused because, he said, his earlier statements were lies concocted to get a reward offered for any evidence that would help solve Jones's murder.
Is Armstrong Flooring Going Out Of Business,
Is It A Sin To Drink Alcohol Catholic,
Whdh News Team,
Firelands Border Terriers,
Articles G
