Brown v. State
Decision Date | 29 June 2007 |
Docket Number | CR-04-0293. |
Citation | 11 So.3d 866 |
Parties | Michael BROWN v. STATE of Alabama. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Troy King, atty. gen., and Jasper B. Roberts, Jr., asst. atty. gen., for appellee.
The appellant, Michael Brown, was convicted of murdering Betty Kirkpatrick during the course of committing a robbery and a burglary, offenses defined as capital by §§ 13A-5-40(a)(2) and 13A-5-40(a)(4), Ala.Code 1975. The jury, by a vote of 11 to 1, recommended that Brown be sentenced to death. The circuit court followed the jury's recommendation and sentenced Brown to death. This appeal followed.
The State's evidence tended to show the following. On October 12, 2001, Ricky Kirkpatrick and his wife discovered the body of his 65-year-old mother, Betty Kirkpatrick, in her mobile home in Hueytown. Her head was covered with a plastic bag and her throat had been cut. A knife and a paper towel were lying on her chest. Betty Kirkpatrick's purse and her gold 1986 Ford Thunderbird automobile were missing. The forensic pathologist testified that Betty Kirkpatrick died of "asphyxia by strangulation and smothering." (R. 431.) She also had bruises on her face and hands that, he said, were caused by blunt-force trauma.
Several witnesses testified that they saw Brown driving a gold Thunderbird around the time of the murder. Alisha Spindlow testified that she saw Brown driving a gold Thunderbird and that he told her that he had killed Betty Kirkpatrick. Another individual, Kevin Clayton, testified that he saw Brown two days after the murder, that he was driving a gold Thunderbird, and that he told him that he got the car from a lady and the car would not be "hot" until the lady's body was discovered. Kelly Watkins said that Brown was driving a gold Thunderbird around the time of the murder and that he told her that he had killed the lady who owned it. Watkins said that Brown told her that he had tried to choke the victim but she would not die so he cut her throat with a knife he got from the kitchen of her house.
Forensic tests were also conducted on the bloodstains found on the paper towel discovered on Betty Kirkpatrick's chest. Carl Mauterer, a forensic scientist with the Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences, testified that one stain was tested and found to be consistent with Brown's blood—Brown could not be excluded as the donor.
Detective Charles Hagler also testified that Brown told him that he went to Betty Kirkpatrick's mobile home with three other individuals, Robert Smith, Kevin Clayton (who testified at Brown's trial), and Moses Smiley, to rob Betty Kirkpatrick but that Robert Smith killed Kirkpatrick.
The jury found Brown guilty of the two capital offenses charged in the indictment. A separate sentencing hearing was held. See § 13A-5-46, Ala.Code 1975. The jury recommended, by a vote of 11 to 1, that Brown be sentenced to death. A presentence report was then prepared as required by § 13A-5-47, Ala.Code 1975, and the circuit court held a separate sentencing hearing. After hearing testimony the circuit court sentenced Brown to death. This appeal, which is automatic in a case involving the death penalty, followed. See § 13A-5-53, Ala.Code 1975.
Brown has been sentenced to death. According to Rule 45A, Ala.R.App.P., this Court must review the record of the trial proceedings for "plain error." Rule 45A, Ala.R.App.P., states:
"In all cases in which the death penalty has been imposed, the Court of Criminal Appeals shall notice any plain error or defect in the proceedings under review whether or not brought to the attention of the trial court, and take appropriate appellate action by reason thereof, whenever such error has or probably has adversely affected the substantial right of the appellant."
In describing this standard of review, this Court has stated:
""
Smith v. State, 795 So.2d 788, 797-98 (Ala. Crim.App.2000), quoting Hall v. State, 820 So.2d 113, 121-22 (Ala.Crim.App.1999).
The majority of the issues raised on appeal were never brought to the circuit court's attention. The "failure to object at trial does not bar our review of these issues; however, it does weigh against any claim of prejudice he now makes on appeal." Brooks v. State, 973 So.2d 380, 387 (Ala.Crim.App.2006) ( ).
Brown argues that his trial counsel, Franklin Neumann, had a conflict of interest because Neumann had previously prosecuted a case against Brown and that previous conviction was used as an aggravating circumstance to support the death sentence in this case. He asserts that as a result of the conflict, Neumann's performance was deficient.
When this matter was brought to the circuit court's attention, Brown stated on the record that he waived any conflict. Thus, Brown invited any error. " " Scott v. State, 937 So.2d 1065, 1075 (Ala.Crim.App.2005), quoting Adams v. State, 955 So.2d 1037, 1050-1051 (Ala. Crim.App.2003). Accordingly, we review this claim for plain error. See Rule 45A, Ala.R.App.P.
The following occurred when this matter was discussed at a pretrial hearing:
(R. 6-7.)
The record shows that in 1995 Brown pleaded guilty to attempted rape in the first degree. The case-action-summary sheet for that case lists another assistant district attorney as the prosecutor who was present at the guilty-plea hearing. (Supp. R. 72.) The court suspended Brown's sentence and placed him on probation. In 1997, Brown was charged with violating the terms of his probation. The first page of the case-action-summary sheet for the probation-revocation proceeding lists Franklin Neumann as the assistant district attorney who prosecuted that violation. The remainder of the case-action-summary sheet for the probation revocation is not in the record; therefore, we do not know if Neumann was the assistant district attorney present during the hearing on Brown's probation revocation. However, the record does show that Neumann did not prosecute Brown on the attempted-rape charge.
In Brownlee v. State, 666 So.2d 91 (Ala. Crim.App.1995), we addressed a similar issue and stated:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Petersen v. State
..." Phillips v. State, [Ms. CR-12-0197, December 18, 2015] ––– So. 3d ––––, –––– (Ala. Crim. App. 2015) (quoting Brown v. State, 11 So. 3d 866, 891 (Ala. Crim. App. 2007) ).The trial court did not commit any error–-plain or otherwise–-in death-qualifying the prospective jurors. Accordingly, P......
-
Jones v. Chatman
...cases which have found similar arguments to be improper. See Goodin v. State, 787 So. 2d 639, 652-53 (Miss. 2001); Brown v. State, 11 So. 3d 866, 918-19 (Ala. Crim. App. 2007); State v. Johnson, 360 S.E.2d 317, 324 (S.C. 1987). Despite Petitioner's argument, however, this Court does not fin......
- Reynolds v. State Of Ala.
-
Woolf v. State
...Ex parte C.G., 841 So.2d 292, 301 (Ala.2002), quoting Pumphrey v. State, 156 Ala. 103, 106, 47 So. 156, 157 (1908)." Brown v. State, 11 So.3d 866, 914 (Ala.Crim.App.2007).Accepting as true all the evidence offered by the State and according the State all legitimate inferences from that evid......