affirming trial court’s admission of detailed account of defendant’s participation in an armed robbery about one month before the commission of the charged first-degree murder of a police officer, emphasizing that “[w]ide latitude is generally allowed in the development of evidence of motive”
How later courts described this case
- affirming trial court’s admission of detailed account of defendant’s participation in an armed robbery about one month before the commission of the charged first-degree murder of a police officer, emphasizing that “[w]ide latitude is generally allowed in the development of evidence of motive”
- first gunshot would have incapacitated victim, which supported inference of reflection before second and third shots.
- "The issue when determining the proportionality of a death sentence is not whether any similar case can be found in which the jury imposed a life sentence, but rather whether the death sentence is excessive or disproportionate in light of `similar cases' as a whole."
- evidence that a defendant slipped out of handcuffs before attacking a state trooper gives rise to a reasonable inference of deliberation
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
*545 DONNELLY, Judge,
dissenting.
Whenever the death penalty is imposed in any case, “the sentence shall be reviewed on the record by the supreme court of Missouri” and this Court must determine whether such sentence “was imposed under the influence of passion, prejudice, or any other arbitrary factor * * § 565.035, RSMo 1986.
In Godfrey v. Georgia, 446 U.S. 420, 428 , 100 S.Ct. 1759, 1764 , 64 L.Ed.2d 398 (1980), the Court held “that if a State wishes to authorize capital punishment it has a constitutional responsibility to * * * apply its law in a manner that avoids the arbitrary and capricious infliction of the death penalty.” And the Court held that a death sentence cannot be permitted to stand when the circumstances under which it was imposed “create a substantial risk that the punishment will be inflicted in an arbitrary and capricious manner.” 446 U.S., at 427 , 100 S.Ct., at 1764 .
Given the circumstances in this case, I would set the judgment aside and resen-tence appellant to life imprisonment without eligibility for probation, parole, or release except by act of the governor.
I respectfully dissent.