Only transporters hauling mobile homes into or out of the community were required to check in before entering. Robinsons other known or suspected victims are Izabela Lewicka, Suzette Trouten, Beverly Bonner, Sheila Faith, and Faiths 15-year-old daughter Debbie. However, after defense counsel provided a more detailed explanation of the penalty phase process and the jury's duty to weigh aggravating and mitigating circumstances, Juror 39 confirmed she would consider defendant's mitigating circumstances, including his character and background, in arriving at a sentencing decision. On September 12, 2002, the defense filed a motion to transport Robinson to the University of Kansas Medical Center (KU Medical Center) for MRI and PET scans. 2. In fall 1984, Robinson told Donald and Helen a baby would be available in October. Using known dental x-rays, Young opined the victim was Debbie Faith. Though married to Nancy since 1964, Robinsons infidelity was an ongoing issue in their marriage. Now, listen to a stunning phone call with the killer and see what happened to the one baby who survived his madness. He is survived by his wife of 51 years, Sybil Robinson; daughters, Shannon (Scott) Smith and Stacey (Pete) Thompson; grandchildren, Kelsey, Hope and . Moreover, this isolated remark was likely to have far less impact than the State's overwhelming and compelling evidence establishing that Robinson violently murdered this young, disabled teenager and her mother and, for years thereafter, reaped the financial benefits of his horrific acts by stealing their Social Security benefit payments. Robinson, an award completely engineered by Robinson. See Bobo, 102 Ark.App. In January 1985, Robinson told Gaddis another organization, Hope House, had referred a young lady to his program, and he had placed her at a motel in Kansas. 48. The burden of proof is on the party alleging the discretion is abused. Robinson also cites State v. Hall, 246 Kan. 728, 793 P.2d 737 (1990), overruled in part on other grounds by Ferguson v. State, 276 Kan. 428, 78 P.3d 40 (2003), in support of the same argument. Tosh is distinguishable, and the remark was not improper under these facts. Glines noticed some of the letters were addressed to a person in Minnesota or Michigan, and there was no return address, only the name Sue, Suzette, or the initials ST. Glines mailed the letters that day from Milpitas, where all mail is sent to and postmarked San Jose, California. In my view, this is a blatant example of ex post facto jurisprudence. Moreover, the prosecutor immediately clarified that he had not intended for his remarks to be construed as a statement on the presumption of innocence. See Rivera, 42 Kan.App.2d at 1010. This process is all about finding just punishment, fairness, and I'm sure we would all agree that capital punishment should be reserved for the most severe crimes. at 2756 (Breyer, J., dissenting.) During the conversation, Juror 147 told another juror that he had learned from the Bible that in order to be granted mercy, one must ask for mercy, repent, and forgive. However, this difference of opinion does not equate to a finding of an abuse of discretion, particularly in light of the diligence and thoroughness Judge Anderson exercised in the design and implementation of his effective four-part jury selection process. Norman said Shelia called him Jim Turner either in a letter or during their last telephone conversation. However, K.S.A. Kleypas is distinguishable, and we hold there was no error in this instance. 519, 524, 616 N.W.2d 710 (2000) (use of juror numbers did not undermine presumption of innocence where nothing suggested practice was unique to defendant); cf. See State v. Kleypas, 272 Kan. 894, 108788, 40 P.3d 139 (2001), cert. Applicants explained how the use of informants was likely to be unsuccessful because they knew of no informants, other than women who were already involved with Robinson and could not be trusted to maintain confidences. In elaborating further on the second part of the framework, we explained: [I]f arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement is to be prevented, laws must provide explicit standards for those who apply them. There the prosecutor invited jurors to speculate what the victim must have thought when [defendant] burst through that door ; the anguish she must have felt when she saw that knife ; and how long that time must have seemed to [the victim]. 272 Kan. at 1112. From a legal, factual, or logical viewpoint, one simply cannot say that those duties were fulfilled in this case. Trouten's mother believed the signature was Trouten's. He wanted me to give up my family and my grandkids or my grandchild and come and work with him and live with him.. K.S.A. She was wrapped in plastic. For example, defense counsel asked Juror 283 whether she could realistically consider a life sentence knowing the victims in this case were women, after her questionnaire responses expressed that people who prey on innocent women are sick and evil. The district judge granted the motion and ordered those jurors excused, with the proviso that that does not relieve them from the obligation on the summons Neither Robinson, in his motion, nor Judge Anderson, in his ruling, specifically identified Juror 147 as one of those excused for failure to appear. And in the movie he talks about how hard this guy's life has been and how he was a success at one time. In supplemental briefing, Robinson challenged Instruction No. Finally, although there are other aspects of the majority opinion with which I take exception, I see no reason for further argument here. See City of Dodge City v. Ingram, 33 Kan.App.2d 829, 83738, 109 P.3d 1272 (2005) (prosecutor's comments that defense simply arguing smoke and mirrors' and [g]rasping at straws' not improper). denied 521 U.S. 1118 (1997). 03C2249, 2004 WL 2203418, at *13 (N.D.Ill.2004) (unpublished opinion) (copies of e-mails authenticated by sales manager's testimony that they were true and accurate copies); see also Annot., 34 A.L.R. Wood confirmed that he had never represented Robinson or any member of his family in any adoption proceeding nor received payment from Robinson for such legal work. 11 was modeled after language from State v. Grissom, 251 Kan. 851, 889, 840 P.2d 1142 (1992), where we held that the Johnson County District Court had territorial jurisdiction to prosecute defendant because [t]here [wa]s evidence from which a jury could find that Grissom committed criminal acts in Kansas which were a substantial and integral part of an overall continuing crime plan and which were in partial execution of the plan. 251 Kan. at 889. His arguments illustrate that the language in the complaint could have been more specific and precise. The general rule is that an admonition to the jury normally cures the prejudice from an improper admission of evidence. State v. Navarro, 272 Kan. 573, 582, 35 P.3d 802 (2001). denied 537 U.S. 834 (2002), overruled on other grounds by Kansas v. Marsh, 548 U.S. 163, 126 S.Ct. Dillehay also testified that the absence of questions exploring respondents' ability to serve as impartial jurors did not invalidate the venue study. Donald and Helen flew to Kansas City on January 10. His comments were founded on her cross-examination testimony and reasonable inferences from it. Robinson also challenges comments prosecutor Morrison made during voir dire of the fourth small group panel, which he sees as suggesting that a juror could assign little or no weight to mitigating circumstances evidence. See United States v. Green, 178 F.3d 1099 (10th Cir.1999) (search conducted in violation of K.S.A. The seventeenth panel during the second phase of jury selection, small group voir dire, included Jurors 173, 177, 180, 184, 185, and 186. Suzette Marie Trouten was the youngest of Carolyn and Harry Trouten's five children. The State filed its Second Amended Complaint on July 28, adding one charge of premeditated first-degree murder and one charge of aggravated interference with parental custody. No prejudicial error may be found under the cumulative error doctrine if the evidence against the defendant is overwhelming. 213102(4), which addressed the scope and application of the Kansas Criminal Code that was effective July 1, 1970. 222502 and 222503, formerly provided: A warrant shall issue upon affidavit or upon oral testimony given under oath and recorded before the magistrate or judge. at 277071 (Breyer, J., dissenting). During the second phase of jury selection, Judge Anderson assigned veniremembers to small group panels for questioning on bias related to pretrial publicity and the death penalty. Has she been deceived? The State maintains this case presents those other circumstances because the serial killings of Trouten and Lewicka constituted discrete acts rather than unitary conduct. He doesn't care anything about anybody but himself. 2250 (2006) of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act. The other 10 jurors testified that Juror 147 did not read from or quote any verse from the Bible during deliberations that morning or at any time prior. 223408, 223410, 223412, and the holding in State v. Kleypas, 272 Kan. 894, 40 P.3d 139 (2001), cert. Juror 147 brought the Bible with the slip of paper into the jury room. We do not reweigh evidence, resolve evidentiary conflicts, or make witness credibility determinations when reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence. denied 135 S.Ct. 222401a? Remington ended her chat session with Trouten at 12:51 a.m. Remington never saw or spoke to Trouten again. In terms of personal knowledge, I wasn't there at the time. In the first portion of the prosecutor's closing argument, he challenged this evidence and commented: I bet you Bev Bonner's family wouldn't agree with that. We have identified a two-part balancing test for analyzing the propriety of a district court's use of an anonymous jury identification system. We find no error in Judge Anderson's denial of defendant's motion to suppress on these grounds. He leased the unit under Beverly Bonner's name, claiming that Bonner was his sister and that he was storing her belongings while she worked in Australia. 1111, 1117 (N.D.N.Y.1992) (Absent concrete evidence that [the magistrate judge] was involved in his prior capacity as Assistant United States Attorney in an investigation of defendant as an open criminal file to which he was assigned, there is no basis upon which to invalidate the search warrant. 1. Likewise, the prosecutor made improper remarks during closing, but those comments were not gross and flagrant and would have had little weight in the minds of jurors when considered individually and collectively. Viewed in context, the comment was benign. To the extent Robinson's arguments compel us to construe K.S.A. 031011401WEB, 2003 WL 22462511, at *2 (D.Kan.2003) (unpublished opinion) (no reasonable expectation of privacy in trash bags left out within a few feet of an alley on collection day); Martinez, 1999 WL 910029, at *23 (no reasonable expectation of privacy in trash placed outside fence near curb); State v. Baskas, No. Soon after their appointment, Berrigan and O'Brien signed pleadings and motions, played a leading role at motions hearings and status conferences, and handled the examination of witnesses and argument at the January 2002 evidentiary hearing on the venue motion. 2516, 165 L.Ed.2d 429 (2006), concluded that these events did not play a major role in the deliberations to this point and denied the motion. However, that procedure existed as a method of removing potentially biased jurors for cause. 272 Kan. at 995. Robinson also called Ronald Dillehay, a professor of psychology at the University of NevadaReno with expertise in the design and analysis of venue studies and jury selection procedures. According to a Radford.edu timeline on his life, he was named an Eagle Scout and attended a seminary. Here, the prosecutor's comments about the defendant crying and not cryingwhile seated at counsel tablewere not about evidence that came from the witness stand but rather about what the prosecutor said he observed and his opinion about these observations. This is particularly true given that the remarks comprised a few lines of a closing argument in a multiweek trial recorded in thousands of pages of transcript. Whether a sentence is illegal is a question of law over which this court has unlimited review. State v. Howard, 287 Kan. 686, 691, 198 P.3d 146 (2008). Did the prosecutor's suggestion that Debbie Faith witnessed her mother's death constitute prosecutorial misconduct? In affirming the denial of continuance, we explained: [S]imply arguing that there may be an issue worthy of another motion is insufficient to justify a continuance. Specifically, he contends the trial court erred by: (1) admitting Cathy Norman's testimony regarding contents of a writing discussing victim Sheila Faith's sexual proclivities; (2) admitting e-mails in violation of the best evidence and authentication rules; (3) admitting evidence of uncharged homicides in violation of K.S.A. To satisfy substantive due process requirements, a statute must not be applied to parties in an arbitrary or capricious manner. In the absence of any objection, we consider whether Judge Anderson had an affirmative duty to exclude Norman's testimony. See State v. Albright, 283 Kan. 418, 42627, 153 P.3d 497 (2007) (prosecutor's inadvertent and isolated violation of order in limine was not gross and flagrant or the product of ill will). The decision in Kleypas did declare the weighing equation of K.S.A. Even the minority of courts that have found case-specific questioning to be required under certain circumstances would not take issue with Judge Anderson's rulings. Murder by abuse requires both elements. Robinson believes Juror 173's comments about the uncharged homicide of Paula Godfrey and his characterization of Robinson as a predator tainted the entire panel. 22301a, like the territorial limits on law enforcement officers in K.S.A. She wants the money or the car. Taylor confirmed the exhibit was a true and accurate copy of the message she received on her Hotmail account. In fact, the evidence strongly suggests otherwise. After Robinson's objection, the prosecutor moved on to other issues at the district judge's urging and made no further reference to the subject. 545 F.3d at 1243. 257 Kan. at 1019. Defense counsel implicitly acknowledged the unreliability of these experts' preliminary findings during posttrial argument, explaining the defense did not call Nerad or Lewis as witnesses because a half-baked mitigation defense would have been worse than no defense at all. Under the same statutory authority, Robinson argues LPD officers exceeded their jurisdiction by executing the warrant to search Robinson's property in Linn County.
