 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Tomlin v. State5/31/2002
The appellant, Phillip Wayne Tomlin, appeals his conviction for the intentional murders of Ricky Brune and Cheryl Moore, an offense punishable by death because two or more people were intentionally killed pursuant to one act or a series of acts. See § 13-11-2(a)(10), Ala. Code 1975, repealed. Tomlin moved that the trial court accept the previously entered jury recommendation of 12 - 0 for life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. After a sentencing hearing before the trial court, the court ordered that Tomlin be sentenced to death by electrocution.
This case has a long and complicated procedural history. In 1978, Tomlin was tried and convicted for the double murder of Brune and Moore. This Court affirmed Tomlin's conviction but remanded the case for the trial court to correct its sentencing order. See Tomlin v. State, 443 So. 2d 47 (Ala.Crim.App. 1979). While Tomlin's case was pending on certiorari review in the Alabama Supreme Court, the United States Supreme Court released its decision in Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625 (1980). The United States Supreme Court in Beck, held that the death-penalty statute under which Tomlin had been convicted was defective because it did not allow a jury to consider any lesser-included offenses. The Alabama Supreme Court ordered that Tomlin be retried based on Beck v. Alabama. Again, while the case was pending on application for rehearing in the Alabama Supreme Court, the United States Supreme Court released its decision in Hopper v. Evans, 456 U.S. 605 (1982). In Hopper, the court held that because the defendant had admitted that he intentionally shot the victim there was no prejudice in the trial court's failure to instruct the jury on any lesser-included offenses. In light of the court's decision in Hopper, the Alabama Supreme Court withdrew its order directing that Tomlin be granted a new trial and found no prejudice because Tomlin presented an alibi defense. Tomlin v. State, 443 So. 2d 59 (Ala. 1983). This Court thereafter affirmed Tomlin's conviction and sentence after the trial court corrected its written findings. Tomlin v. State, 516 So. 2d 790 (Ala.Crim.App. 1986). On second application for rehearing, the Alabama Supreme Court reversed Tomlin's conviction, finding plain error in the prosecutor's closing argument. The court found that the argument implied that the trial court believed that there was sufficient evidence to convict Tomlin. See Ex parte Tomlin, 540 So. 2d 668 (Ala. 1988).
In 1990, Tomlin was retried on the capital charges and again convicted. On appeal, this Court reversed Tomlin's conviction because of prosecutorial misconduct -- the prosecutor presented evidence indicating that Tomlin's co-defendant, John Daniels, was awaiting execution on Alabama's death row. This Court also cited numerous other instances that warranted a new trial. See Tomlin v. State, 591 So. 2d 550 (Ala.Crim.App. 1991).
In 1993, Tomlin was tried and convicted for the third time. This conviction was reversed because of juror misconduct -- several jurors failed to disclose certain information during voir dire examination. See Tomlin v. State, 695 So. 2d 157 (Ala. 1996).
In 1999, Tomlin was tried for a fourth time and was convicted. It is from this fourth conviction and sentence of death that Tomlin now appeals.
The State's evidence has been detailed in the previous opinions of this Court. See Tomlin v. State, 443 So. 2d 47, 516 So. 2d 790, and 591 So. 2d 550. The evidence presented at Tomlin's fourth trial did not vary in any great respect from the evidence presented at the other trials. The State's evidence tended to show that on January 2, 1997, Charles Castro and his wife reported to police that a body was lying
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 Alabama DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|