Duncan v. State
Decision Date | 17 September 1999 |
Citation | 827 So.2d 838 |
Parties | Trace Royal DUNCAN v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Joe W. Morgan, Jr., Birmingham, for appellant.
Bill Pryor, atty. gen., and Michael B. Billingsley, asst. atty. gen., for appellee.
The appellant, Trace Royal Duncan, was charged in a two-count indictment with the capital murder of Vicki Deblieux. Count I of the indictment charged the appellant with the capital offense of murder committed during a kidnapping in the first degree, see § 13A-5-40(a)(1), Ala.Code 1975. Count II of the indictment charged the appellant with the capital offense of murder committed during a robbery in the first degree, see § 13A-5-40(a)(2), Ala. Code 1975. The jury found the appellant guilty on both counts of the indictment and returned an advisory verdict recommending the death penalty, by a vote of 10 to 2. A separate sentencing hearing was held before the trial court, after which the appellant was sentenced to death by electrocution.
The trial court made the following findings of fact concerning the offense:
The record also contains the following statement written by the appellant:
The appellant, after making this statement, added further information upon questioning by the authorities; he then reviewed and signed the statement. That portion of the statement is as follows:
The appellant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for capital murder under § 13A-5-40(a)(1) because, he says, the State failed to prove the elements of kidnapping in the first degree. The appellant argues that there was no evidence of a kidnapping, because, he says, the victim was never restrained, held, abducted, or forcibly confined. In support of his argument, the appellant contends that the victim was willing to be a passenger in the truck and was voluntarily with the participants at the scene of the killing until the moment of her death.
Section 13A-6-43 defines "kidnapping in the first degree" as follows:
The abduction element of kidnapping in the first degree is defined at § 13A-6-40(2), as follows:
Additionally, "restrain" is defined at § 13A-6-40(1), Ala.Code 1975, as follows:
This Court stated in Owens v. State, 531 So.2d 2, 13-14 (Ala.Cr.App.1986):
The State's evidence revealed that the appellant and his codefendants picked up the victim with the intent to "inflict physical injury upon" her. The appellant's written statement indicated that "Dale had been talking about killing somebody for some time that night," prior to the victim's abduction. The act of transporting the victim to an isolated area clearly supports the conclusion that the appellant and his accomplices intended to prevent her liberation by "[s]ecreting [her] or holding [her] in a place where [she was] not likely to be found." The evidence indicated that the restraint required for the abduction of the victim was accomplished through "deception." § 13A-6-40(1)(a). The evidence indicated that the victim was hitchhiking to Louisiana to see her mother and that the appellant and his codefendants, acting under false pretenses, informed the victim that they would take her to Louisiana. Additionally, evidence was presented that the victim protested when the car exited the interstate and the driver drove to a wooded area to pick up a truck. Moreover, the evidence indicated that the victim asked to be let out of the car when she realized that they were not headed toward her destination. Thus, at that point, she was being held against her will. Evidence was presented that immediately before her death, the victim was hit in the head with a beer bottle, at which time she attempted to run away but was tackled, and then kicked and beaten until she died. According to his own statement, the appellant participated in the murder. The evidence strongly suggests that the foursome intended to harm Deblieux. Moreover, there was evidence indicating that the appellant stood watch over the victim when she "used the bathroom" in the woods and that he returned to tell the others that she...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Capote v. State
...October 10, 1996) (Tenn. Crim. App. 1996) (some citations omitted) (unpublished opinion).’ " Duncan v. State, 827 So. 2d 838, 859-860 (Ala. Crim. App. 1999). Contrary to Capote's assertion, the comments by the prosecutor were not directed at Capote's failure to testify. Instead, when viewed......
-
Dearman v. State
...E.g., Gamble v. State, 791 So.2d 409, 444 (Ala.Crim.App.2000); Flowers v. State, 799 So.2d 966, 984 (Ala.Crim.App.1999); Duncan v. State, 827 So.2d 838, 848 Ziegler v. State, 886 So.2d 127, 140 (Ala.Crim.App.2003). With regard to intent, this Court has stated, "intent, ... being a state or ......
-
Wimbley v. State
...Gamble v. State, 791 So.2d 409, 444 (Ala.Crim.App.2000) ; Flowers v. State, 799 So.2d 966, 984 (Ala.Crim.App.1999) ; Duncan v. State, 827 So.2d 838, 848 (Ala.Crim.App.1999).”Ziegler v. State, 886 So.2d 127, 140 (Ala.Crim.App.2003). “Initially, we note that the trial court instructed the jur......
-
Shanklin v. State
...State, 791 So. 2d 409, 444 (Ala. Crim. App. 2000); Flowers v. State, 799 So. 2d 966, 984 (Ala. Crim. App. 1999); Duncan v. State, 827 So. 2d 838, 848 (Ala. Crim. App. 1999).'"Ziegler v. State, 886 So. 2d 127, 140 (Ala. Crim. App. 2003). "'"'[N]o defendant is guilty of a capital offense unle......