 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Hawkins11/4/2005
route they drove on the way back because he was so shaken from the altercation. He also did not recall stopping at a store in Johnson City or calling his sister.
The appellant said that he was heavily intoxicated when he arrived at his sister's house. He woke the next morning on the floor of his niece's bedroom and found the room in complete disarray. He did not know what had happened to his clothes and could not find them. Later that morning, his brother-in-law drove him home.
On April 22, 2002, the victim's brother, Billy, called the appellant and informed him that the victim was dead. The appellant was upset by the news. At some point that day, the appellant gave a statement at the sheriff's department, but he did not tell the detectives that he had seen the victim on April 20. In fact, he lied and told police that he was with someone named Amy on the night of April 20. He acknowledged making several telephone calls to the Gentrys on April 22. On April 23, the appellant went to Booher's house. The Gentrys arrived at Booher's residence, and the appellant talked to them about what had happened the night of the murder.
The appellant said he was arrested at approximately 4:00 p.m. or 5:00 p.m. on April 24, 2002, at Booher's house. Just prior to his arrest, the appellant took over 20 Lortab pills, and he drank a little over twelve beers. Police took the appellant to the sheriff's department for questioning. Detective Christian told the appellant that he needed to advise the appellant of his Miranda rights, then he began reading something very fast. The appellant testified that he did not know what his Miranda rights were. Regardless, the appellant signed a waiver of rights form and voluntarily spoke with Detective Christian. During the interview, the appellant admitted to Detective Christian that he saw the victim the night of the murder. He told the detectives that he had heard that the victim's brother, Billy, had raped Booher, and he thought the victim had tried to do the same thing. He related to police that when he arrived at the victim's camper on the night of the murder, the victim attacked him with a gun. The appellant explained to police that he used a stick to defend himself. The appellant testified that the detective read his statement to him but said he read it so fast that he could not understand him. Regardless, the appellant signed his statement, believing that Detective Christian had written everything that the appellant had told him.
On cross-examination, the appellant said that he and the victim had fought before, but the victim had never been seriously injured. The appellant acknowledged that he told Detective Christian he did not own a gun; however, he had taken a gun from a man who had borrowed money from him, and the man never returned for the gun. He said he tied the gun in a sock and took it to Eve Griffin's house. The appellant maintained that if he told Garrett that he killed the victim because he was bored, he only made the remark sarcastically because he and Garrett were arguing. He remembered calling his ex-wife, Regina Hawkins, on the day he was arrested, acknowledging that he told her that no one was going to call him a "snitch."
Based upon the foregoing evidence, the appellant was convicted of first degree premeditated murder, and he received a sentence of life imprisonment. On appeal, the appellant raises the following issues for our review:
(1) whether the trial court erred in refusing to admit into evidence tape recordings of telephone calls which the victim made in February 2002;
(2) whether the trial court erred in refusing to allow the appellant to cross-examine Mrs. Gentry regarding a state
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Tennessee DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|