Campbell v. Commonwealth
| Decision Date | 21 April 2011 |
| Docket Number | 2009-SC-000489-MR |
| Parties | JAMARKOS CAMPBELL APPELLANT v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY APPELLEE |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED OPINION
THIS OPINION IS DESIGNATED "NOT TO BE PUBLISHED." PURSUANT TO THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PROMULGATED BY THE SUPREME COURT, CR 76.28(4)(C), THIS OPINION IS NOT TO BE PUBLISHED AND SHALL NOT BE CITED OR USED AS BINDING PRECEDENT IN ANY OTHER CASE IN ANY COURT OF THIS STATE; HOWEVER, UNPUBLISHED KENTUCKY APPELLATE DECISIONS, RENDERED AFTER JANUARY 1, 2003, MAY BE CITED FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COURT IF THERE IS NO PUBLISHED OPINION THAT WOULD ADEQUATELY ADDRESS THE ISSUE BEFORE THE COURT. OPINIONS CITED FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COURT SHALL BE SET OUT AS AN UNPUBLISHED DECISION IN THE FILED DOCUMENT AND A COPY OF THE ENTIRE DECISION SHALL BE TENDERED ALONG WITH THE DOCUMENT TO THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES TO THE ACTION.
ON APPEAL FROM LINCOLN CIRCUIT COURT
MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT
Appellant, Jamarkos Campbell, appeals as a matter of right, Ky. Const. § 110, from a judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of two counts of murder, two counts of first-degree wanton endangerment, two counts of first-degree robbery, and one count of first-degree burglary. For these crimes, Campbell was sentenced to a total sentence of life without the possibility of parole for twenty-five years.
Campbell now raises the following arguments on appeal: (1) that his rights were violated by the taking of a DNA sample without legal authority and in violation of medical protocols, and the entering of the sample into the Kentucky Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) database; (2) that his waiver of a juvenile transfer hearing was invalid; (3) that the first-degree burglary instruction was erroneous; (4) that the trial court erred by failing to give avoluntary intoxication instruction on the burglary and robbery charges; (5) that the prosecutor made improper statements in closing arguments impugning the integrity of defense counsel; (6) that the adult convictions for crimes committed after the present crimes were improperly admitted during the sentencing phase; and (7) that the trial court erred in submitting for the jury's consideration the penalty of life without the possibility of parole for twenty-five years on the two murder charges. For the reasons stated below, we affirm.
In the light most favorable to the verdict, the facts are as follows. Campbell was born on February 6, 1985. In February 2002, Campbell and his accomplices in the present crimes, Matthew Tolson, Nicholas Mundy, Deonte Simmons, and Charles Smith (collectively, codefendants) were friends who considered themselves to be members of the "Crips" gang. Campbell was five days short of being seventeen years old on the date of the crimes. Several of the codefendants were friends with a girl who told them about her drug dealer, Ryan Shangraw, who lived in a trailer in Lincoln County.
Believing that Shangraw would be a good target for a robbery, on February 1, 2002, the codefendants traveled to Lincoln County for that purpose. In preparation for the robbery the group obtained firearms, including a rifle and two handguns, and each got a bandanna to wear as a disguise. The group smoked marijuana and drank on the way to Shangraw's trailer.
In the meantime, Shangraw, Bo Upton, Tabitha Wilder, and Tara Strunkhad gathered at Shangraw's trailer prior to their planned attendance at a high-school dance. As they were socializing and smoking marijuana, four of the codefendants, led by Campbell wielding the rifle, burst into the trailer and demanded drugs and money. Shangraw and Upton told them to "calm down and well get you what you want," and Shangraw got up and started toward the kitchen. Chaos erupted as the girls at the trailer screamed and begged for their lives. As Shangraw walked toward the kitchen, Campbell shot and killed him.1
Upton then stood up and threw his wallet toward the group. The pandemonium escalated and numerous shots were fired in the small living room of the trailer. As a result, Upton was also shot and killed, Wilder was shot in the arm, and Strunk's arm was grazed by a bullet.
The group made a successful getaway, and as they fled from the scene they discarded the guns and bandannas, including Campbell's. These discarded items were recovered by police shortly after the shootings. Campbell's bandanna was subsequently tested for DNA, and the resulting DNA data was uploaded into the CODIS system. However, despite this physical evidence no leads developed and the crimes remained unsolved.
In 2006 Campbell, incarcerated in the Madison County jail on an unrelated matter, was caught in possession of contraband. He had placed the contraband in his mouth, and spit it out as his cell was being searched. ADNA sample, taken to link him to the contraband, was entered into CODIS. That sample was found to match the one entered into CODIS from one of the bandannas found by police after the Lincoln County murders. This match led the police investigating the Lincoln County incident to Campbell.
Campbell was interviewed and eventually he admitted to being present at the Lincoln County crimes, though he denied entering the trailer or shooting anyone. His statements, and further investigation, led to arrest of the other codefendants.
On April 18, 2008, a juvenile complaint was filed charging Campbell, then 23 years-old, with two counts of murder and two counts of first-degree assault in connection with the events of February 1, 2002. The Commonwealth moved to transfer the case to circuit court pursuant to KRS 635.020(2), and Campbell, at the same time, filed a motion to waive his right to a transfer hearing. Lincoln District Court accordingly, pursuant to Campbell's request, granted transfer for trial of Campbell as an adult without conducting a transfer hearing.
On July 26, 2008, Campbell was indicted for two counts of murder, two counts of attempted murder, two counts of first-degree robbery, and one count of first-degree burglary. Trial was held in May 2009.2 At the conclusion of the evidence the jury found Campbell guilty of one count of intentional murder as to Shangraw; one count of wanton murder as to Upton; two counts of first-degree wanton endangerment as to Wilder and Strunk; two counts of first-degree robbery; and one count of first degree burglary. As a result of these convictions, the trial court entered judgment sentencing him to a total term of life without the possibility of parole for twenty-five years. This appeal followed.
Campbell first argues that the DNA sample taken from him at the Madison County jail in 2006 was unlawfully obtained without a warrant or consent; was taken in violation of prescribed medical protocols designed to insure the integrity of the sample; and was then impermissibly uploaded into CODIS without any statutory authority for doing so.
As previously discussed, following the commission of the crimes at Shangraw's trailer, the police recovered a bandanna, tested it for DNA, and loaded that DNA into the CODIS database. In due course, the unknown 2002 sample from the bandanna was matched with Campbell's known 2006 sample taken at the Madison County jail.
Campbell filed a motion seeking to suppress the DNA match, arguing that the taking of the 2006 sample "was performed in violation of KRS 17.170 and 502 KAR 32:010 which require that a DNA sample . . . be obtained in a medically approved manner by [medically trained personnel]." He later expanded his argument to allege that the 2006 sample was obtained pursuantto a warrantless seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and that the sample was uploaded into CODIS without statutory authorization.3
At a hearing held on February 27, 2009, the Commonwealth argued that the 2006 DNA sample was properly taken and properly loaded into CODIS. Defense counsel argued otherwise, noting that his "argument is stated in the record." Campbell's counsel observed, "We do not have all the information on that [obtaining the 2006 DNA sample] without a hearing." However, Campbell did not seek to call any witnesses to further develop the circumstances surrounding the taking of the 2006 sample, nor did he request a continuance to allow him to present additional evidence on the issue.4
The trial court addressed the DNA suppression issue as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial