Brown v. State
Citation | 982 So.2d 565 |
Decision Date | 28 April 2006 |
Docket Number | CR-01-1900. |
Parties | Anthony Eugene BROWN v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Matthew C. Lamere, Dothan, for appellant.
William H. Pryor, Jr., and Troy King, attys. gen., and Michael A. Nunnelley and Stephen Shows, asst. attys. gen., for appellee.
The appellant, Anthony Eugene Brown, was convicted of capital murder for the intentional murder of Virginia Keel during the commission of a burglary in the first degree, in violation of § 13A-5-40(a)(4), Ala.Code 1975. Brown had entered pleas of not guilty and not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect. By a vote of 10 to 2, the jury returned an advisory verdict of death. Thereafter, the trial court held a separate sentencing hearing and sentenced Brown to death.
Following the sentencing hearing before the trial court, the trial judge issued an order including a summary of the crime and Brown's participation in it. The order summarized the facts of the offense as follows:
Brown argues that the trial court erred by refusing to submit the issue of his competency to stand trial to a jury for its determination. The record indicates that, before trial, Brown filed a motion for a mental evaluation, requesting that a qualified mental-health professional determine his mental condition and competency to stand trial, as well as his mental condition at the time of his offense and at the time he waived his constitutional rights in giving his statement to the authorities. Defense counsel argued in the motion that Brown had informed him that he had previously been treated for mental illness and that he was continuing to suffer from mental illness. Brown's motion made no request for a competency hearing by the jury. Thereafter, the circuit court ordered that Brown undergo a mental examination to determine, among other things, his competency to stand trial, specifically "pertaining to his present ability to understand the nature and object of the proceedings against [him] and his ability to assist defense counsel reasonably in the preparation of his defense." Pursuant to this order, Brown was admitted to Taylor Hardin Secure Medical Facility, where he was examined for just under 30 days by Dr. James Hooper. The lengthy report contained in the record suggests that Brown demonstrated a great deal of problematic behavior, that he attempted suicide, and that he was highly manipulative during his stay. Brown was closely observed, and Dr. Hooper concluded that he "was able to demonstrate adequate knowledge of courtroom procedures and personnel."
Approximately a year later, Brown filed...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Petersen v. State
...brief, p. 90, quoting Deck v. Missouri, 544 U.S. 622, 630-31, 125 S.Ct. 2007, 161 L.Ed.2d 953 (2005), and Brown v. State, 982 So. 2d 565, 594 (Ala. Crim. App. 2006).) As a result, Petersen contends that his rights to "due process, a fair trial, and a reliable sentence as provided by the Fif......
-
Woolf v. State
...State, 631 So.2d 1073, 1078 (Ala.Cr.App.1993) ; Williams v. State, 601 So.2d 1062, 1072 (Ala.Cr.App.1991).' " ' " Brown v. State, 982 So.2d 565, 601–02 (Ala.Crim.App.2006) (quoting Maples v. State, 758 So.2d 1, 42–43 (Ala.Crim.App.1999) (additional citations omitted)). Except for his reply ......
-
Mashburn v. State
...available to the defense from another source.’ Hurst v. State, 469 So.2d 720, 723 (Ala.Crim.App.1985). See also Brown v. State, 982 So.2d 565 (Ala.Crim.App.2006) ; McGowan v. State, 990 So.2d 931 (Ala.Crim.App.2003) ; Gardner v. State, 530 So.2d 250 (Ala.Crim.App.1987).”Vanpelt v. State, 74......
-
Shanklin v. State
...State, 631 So. 2d 1073, 1078 (Ala. Cr. App. 1993); Williams v. State, 601 So. 2d 1062, 1072 (Ala. Cr. App. 1991) "Brown v. State, 982 So. 2d 565, 601-02 (Ala. Crim. App. 2006) (quoting Maples v. State, 758 So. 2d 1, 42-43 (Ala. Crim. App. 1999) (additional citations omitted))." Woolf, ___ S......