Banks v. State
Decision Date | 09 August 2002 |
Citation | 845 So.2d 9 |
Parties | Medell BANKS, Jr. v. STATE of Alabama. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
James D. Evans, Butler; Joseph W. Hutchinson III, Butler; and Richard J. Riley, Birmingham, for appellant.
William H. Pryor, Jr., atty. gen., and E. Vincent Carroll, deputy atty. gen., for appellee.
On May 7, 2001, Medell Banks entered a "best interest" plea to manslaughter, a violation of § 13A-6-3(a)(1), Ala.Code 1975.1 On June 25, 2001, the trial court sentenced Banks to 15 years in prison.2 This appeal arises from the trial court's denial, after an extensive evidentiary hearing,3 of Banks's motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
The facts in this case are disputed. Banks's wife, Victoria Banks, was serving time in jail following a conviction on charges unrelated to the instant case. In February 1999, while still in jail, Victoria told authorities that she was pregnant. On February 25, 1999, the sheriff allowed her to visit Dr. Katherine Hensleigh. Victoria told the doctor she was pregnant, and the records of the visit indicate that a fetal heartbeat was heard. Victoria visited the doctor again a month later, still maintaining that she was pregnant, and the records of that visit indicate a fetal heartbeat was again heard. Subsequently, Victoria told the sheriff that she wanted to be released from jail to have the baby; she threatened to sue because she was not receiving prenatal care while she was in jail. (R. 344.)
On May 14, 1999, Victoria was released from jail. On August 3, 1999, approximately two months after the baby should have been delivered (R. 265), the sheriff encountered Victoria in town and asked her about the baby. Victoria claimed to have had a miscarriage. On that same day, the sheriff escorted Victoria to Dr. Hensleigh's office, where a nurse examined Victoria and determined that there was no evidence of any retained products of conception.
Banks was taken into custody on August 6, 1999. He, Victoria, and her sister, Diane Tucker, were interrogated several times about the alleged pregnancy.4
As an explanation for Victoria's change in condition, the prosecution maintained that, on or about June 16, 1999 (C. 463), Banks, Victoria, and her sister participated in the smothering or live burial of a baby born to Victoria that evening. The State based its case on incriminatory statements allegedly made by Banks;5 on Banks's voluntarily escorting officers on two occasions to the area where he said he had left the baby in a hole, to no avail; on Victoria's twice telling Dr. Hensleigh, who attended to her while she was in jail, that she was pregnant; on Dr. Hensleigh's having heard a fetal heartbeat during both of Victoria's visits; on Victoria's telling the sheriff that she was pregnant; on Victoria's statements to two women who ministered to her in jail regarding her pregnancy; and on a forensic report that a drop of blood found on a couch in an abandoned mobile home contained DNA from a female "and most probably originated from a close female relative of Victoria Banks." (C. 86.)6 As for motive, the State alleged that Banks was angry because he was not the father of the alleged baby, and that Victoria's boyfriend, who had been convicted of raping Banks's 10-year-old stepdaughter, was the father of the baby.
Before Banks entered the guilty plea, it was the defense's position that Victoria had had a tubal ligation7 in 1995 and that she could not have given birth at the time of the alleged crime. The defense argued that Banks, who had a verbal IQ of 57, gave his statements under the duress of intense and prolonged interrogation without the aid of counsel.
The State in turn argued that, although Victoria had had a tubal ligation, the procedure had failed, and she was therefore able to, and did, become pregnant in 1998. The State relied on Dr. Katherine Hensleigh's testimony that she believed that Victoria had been pregnant because, when she examined Victoria in February and March 1999, she twice heard a fetal heartbeat and she measured her fundal height to be 24 centimeters.8
At his guilty plea proceedings, Banks disputed the factual basis relied upon by the State. (R. 15.) Banks maintained his innocence, stating:
(R. 83.)
Subsequent to the guilty plea proceedings, but before the sentencing proceedings, Banks's trial counsel acquired Victoria's consent to submit to an examination called a hysterosalpingogram (hereinafter "HSG") in order to determine whether the tubal ligation had been effective. At the sentencing hearing, Banks filed a motion for a medical examination of Victoria. The trial court granted this motion on the same day.
As described by Dr. Michael Steinkampf,9 the physician who performed the HSG on Victoria, the test involved the following:
(R. 115-16.)
The HSG was performed on July 12, 2001. The test revealed that Victoria's fallopian tubes were in fact completely occluded, that is, blocked, as of the date of the examination. Based on the results of the test, on July 16, 2001, Banks filed a motion to withdraw his guilty plea, or in the alternative, for a new trial. On July 18, 2001, Banks filed an amendment to the motion. On August 20, 2001, the trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing on the motion. On September 7, 2001, Banks filed a memorandum in support of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea, to which the State responded on September 17, 2001.
In its answer to Banks's motion to withdraw his guilty plea and during the evidentiary hearing, the State maintained that, although Victoria's tubes were shown to be blocked in July 2001, her tubes were clear in the summer of 1998 and she was able to, and did, become pregnant. The State maintained that the blockage detected in July 2001 resulted from a venereal disease and occurred subsequent to the pregnancy.
On September 28, 2001, the trial court issued an order denying Banks's motion to withdraw his guilty plea. That order stated, in pertinent part:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hinton v. State
...that a jury would afford more weight to the testimony of a renowned expert than it would to a lesser-qualified expert. Banks v. State, 845 So.2d 9, 28 (Ala.Crim.App.2002). It is even more reasonable to assume that a jury would afford more weight to the testimony of a competent and qualified......
-
Hubbard v. State
...as to its analysis of the issue, and its conclusion that Hubbard had failed to make a showing of prejudice. See Banks v. State, 845 So.2d 9, 18–19 (Ala. Crim. App. 2002), quoted with approval in Porter v. State, 196 So.3d 365, 366 n.1 (Ala. Crim. App. 2015) (an order filed after a motion fo......
-
Hutchinson v. State
...trial court's judgment and remanded the cause for the trial court to grant Banks's motion to withdraw his guilty plea. Banks v. State, 845 So.2d 9 (Ala.Crim.App.2002). The facts underlying this case are set out in the Court of Criminal Appeals' opinion. The capital-murder charges against Ba......
-
Bradford v. State
...a motion for new trial alleging newly discovered evidence will not be reversed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion. Banks v. State, 845 So.2d 9 (Ala.Cr.App. 2002). Bradford submits the trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion. Courtney Bradford was not available as a witn......
-
Table of Cases
...424.10 Bank of Lexington & Trust Co. v. Vining-Sparks Sec., Inc ., 959 F. 2d 606, 717 (6th Cir. 1992), §346A Banks v. State of Alabama , 845 So. 2d 9 (Ala. Crim. App. 2002), §603 Bannister v. Noble, 812 F 2d 1265, 1268 (10th Cir. 1987), §332.3.1 Banque Libanaise Pour Le Commerce v. Khreich,......
-
Commonly Used Experts
...used as experts in criminal prosecutions, experts in diverse disciplines may prove essential. For example, in Banks v. State of Alabama , 845 So. 2d 9 (Ala. Crim. App. 2002), an expert who was a professor at the University of Alabama Medical School in the Department of Obstetrics and Gyneco......
-
Table of Cases
...424.10 Bank of Lexington & Trust Co. v. Vining-Sparks Sec., Inc ., 959 F. 2d 606, 717 (6th Cir. 1992), §346A Banks v. State of Alabama , 845 So. 2d 9 (Ala. Crim. App. 2002), §603 Bannister v. Noble, 812 F 2d 1265, 1268 (10th Cir. 1987), §332.3.1 Banque Libanaise Pour Le Commerce v. Khreich,......
-
Commonly Used Experts
...used as experts in criminal prosecutions, experts in diverse disciplines may prove essential. For example, in Banks v. State of Alabama , 845 So. 2d 9 (Ala. Crim. App. 2002), an expert who was a professor at the University of Alabama Medical School in the Department of Obstetrics and Gyneco......