Boyd v. State
Citation | 715 So.2d 825 |
Decision Date | 17 January 1997 |
Docket Number | CR-94-1523 |
Parties | Anthony BOYD v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
William J. Willingham, Talladega; and S. Dale Price, Sylacauga, for appellant.
Bill Pryor, atty. gen., and Jack Willis, asst. atty. gen., for appellee.
The appellant, Anthony Boyd, was convicted of capital murder for the intentional murder during a kidnapping in the first degree, see § 13A-5-40(a)(1), Code of Alabama 1975. Following a sentencing hearing, the jury returned an advisory verdict recommending, by a vote of 10 to 2, the imposition of the death penalty. A separate sentencing hearing in front of the trial court was held, and the trial court sentenced the appellant to death by electrocution.
The record contains a summary of the facts and evidence presented this offense, as rendered by the trial court. In pertinent part, it states as follows:
The appellant argues that the prosecutor offered irrelevant and highly prejudicial photographs as evidence during the guilt phase of the trial. The photographs depict the victim following the offense and were used at trial by the coroner to illustrate the nature and location of the injuries of the victim. The appellant submits that these photographs may have been admissible during the sentencing hearing to support the especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel aggravating circumstance, § 13A-5-49(8), Code of Alabama 1975, but he argues that they were improperly admitted during the guilt phase.
The photographs illustrated and corroborated the coroner's testimony concerning the injuries, and further corroborated the testimony of an accomplice, Quintay Cox, who stated that the victim had been taped to a board and that his mouth had been sealed with tape before he was set on fire. Therefore, the evidence was relevant and material at the guilt stage, despite the gruesome nature of the photographs.
In Johnson v. State, 620 So.2d 679, 692 (Ala.Cr.App.1992), rev'd on other grounds, 620 So.2d 709 (Ala.1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 905, 114 S.Ct. 285, 126 L.Ed.2d 235 (1993), the appellant argued that grossly inflammatory photographs should not have been allowed into evidence at the guilt and penalty stages of the trial. In holding that the photographs were admissible at both stages, this court stated:
There was no error in the admission of the photographs during the guilt phase of the appellant's trial.
The appellant argues that the State's use of its peremptory challenges was discriminatory as to both gender and race.
The appellant argues that he presented a prima facie case of racial discrimination concerning the prosecutor's peremptory strikes and that a remand is necessary because the trial court improperly based its determination that the appellant had failed to establish a prima facie case solely on the racial composition of the jury. At trial, the appellant objected to the State's use of its peremptory challenges, alleging that the challenges were not race-neutral. However, in support of his objection, the appellant stated only that the prosecutor used 7 of his 14 strikes against black veniremembers. In light of the entire record, this challenge did not satisfy his burden of proof.
The following transpired concerning this matter:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Capote v. State
...when there is evidence of flight, the trial court may give a proper jury instruction on evidence of flight. See, e.g., Boyd v. State, 715 So. 2d 825 (Ala. Crim. App.), aff'd, 715 So. 2d 852 (Ala. 1998), disapproved of on other grounds by Ex parte Bryant, 951 So. 2d 724 (Ala. 2002)."The pros......
-
Reynolds v. State Of Ala.
...no error, plain or otherwise, in this regard. See Turner v. State, 924 So. 2d 737, 752-53 (Ala. Crim. App. 2002); Boyd v. State, 715 So. 2d 825, 843 (Ala. Crim. App. 1997).C. In a one-sentence argument, Reynolds contends that the circuit court erred to reversal in removing 10 veniremembers ......
-
McGowan v. State
...that instructions containing the `a doubt for which you have a reason' language did not present plain error, see Boyd v. State, 715 So.2d 825, 843-44 (Ala.Crim. App.1997), aff'd, 715 So.2d 852 (Ala. 1998); Williams v. State, 710 So.2d 1276, 1334-55 (Ala.Crim.App.1996), aff'd, 710 So.2d 1350......
-
Williams v. State
...(1985); Sparks v. Parker, 368 So.2d 528 (Ala.1979), appeal dismissed, 444 U.S. 803, 100 S.Ct. 22, 62 L.Ed.2d 16 (1979); Boyd v. State, 715 So.2d 825 (Ala. Cr.App.1997), aff'd, 715 So.2d 852 (Ala.), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 968, 119 S.Ct. 416, 142 L.Ed.2d 338 (1998); Slaton v. State, 680 So.2d......