Oldham v. Commonwealth
| Decision Date | 31 October 2019 |
| Docket Number | 2018-SC-000073-MR,2018-SC-000074-MR |
| Parties | BRANDON L. OLDHAM APPELLANT v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY APPELLEE AND JUAN T. LLOYD APPELLANT v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY APPELLEE |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court (Kentucky) |
IMPORTANT NOTICE NOT TO BE PUBLISHED OPINION
THIS OPINION IS DESIGNATED "NOT TO BE PUBLISHED." PURSUANT TO THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PROMULGATED BY THE SUPREME COURT, CR 76.28(4)(C), THIS OPINION IS NOT TO BE PUBLISHED AND SHALL NOT BE CITED OR USED AS BINDING PRECEDENT IN ANY OTHER CASE IN ANY COURT OF THIS STATE; HOWEVER, UNPUBLISHED KENTUCKY APPELLATE DECISIONS, RENDERED AFTER JANUARY 1, 2003, MAY BE CITED FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COURT IF THERE IS NO PUBLISHED OPINION THAT WOULD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 OPINIONS CITED FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COURT SHALL BE SET OUT AS AN UNPUBLISHED DECISION IN THE FILED DOCUMENT AND A COPY OF THE ENTIRE DECISION SHALL BE TENDERED ALONG WITH THE DOCUMENT TO THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES TO THE ACTION.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
ON APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT
MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT
A Jefferson County Grand Jury indicted Appellants, Brandon L. Oldham and Juan T. Lloyd, for murder, first-degree robbery, and tampering with physical evidence. At a joint trial, the jury found Oldham guilty of murder, criminal facilitation to first-degree robbery, and tampering with physical evidence. The trial court sentenced Oldham to fifty years for murder, five yearsfor criminal facilitation to robbery, and five years for tampering with physical evidence. The court ordered Oldham's sentences to be served consecutively for a total of sixty years' imprisonment. The jury found Lloyd guilty of first-degree robbery, criminal facilitation to murder, and tampering with physical evidence. The trial court sentenced Lloyd to twenty years for first-degree robbery, five years for criminal facilitation to murder, and five years for tampering with physical evidence. The court ordered Lloyd's sentences to be served consecutively for a total of thirty years' imprisonment. Oldham and Lloyd appeal to this Court as a matter of right, Ky. Const. §110(2)(b).
Both Appellants raise issues concerning improper jury selection in violation of Batson v. Kentucky, 106 S. Ct. 1712 (1986), and claim the trial court erred in the admission of certain evidence. Lloyd separately asserts that the trial court erred in denying him his right to confront a witness, denying directed verdict motions, failing to correct discovery violations, prohibiting impeachment evidence, and improperly instructing the jury in a manner that lead to a non-unanimous verdict. After careful review, we affirm the trial court.
Eddie Vinson died from a combination of burns covering seventy-five percent of his body and injuries sustained from a beating to his head and torso. Noah Oldham identified his brother, Brandon Oldham, and his cousin, Juan Lloyd, as Vinson's killers.
During the murder investigation, the Louisville Metro Police located a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) surveillance camera recording which included critical footage for the time before, during, and after Vinson's murder.
In addition to the video, the police collected other evidence, developed forensic lab work, conducted an arson investigation, and interviewed several neighborhood residents. Specifically, Louisville Metro Police Department Homicide Detective Dan Miracle interviewed Noah Oldham and his girlfriend Ashley Greene.
Detective Miracle recorded Noah and Ashley's interview at the police station. During that interview, while watching the grainy ATF video from the night Vinson died, Noah explained what he was seeing on the video and identified four individuals: Vinson, Oldham, Lloyd, and himself. While Ashley lacked any direct knowledge regarding the video's contents, she continually encouraged Noah to tell the detective everything he knew. Following Ashley and Noah's recorded joint interview, officers arrested Oldham and Lloyd for Vinson's murder.
During the investigation, police recovered a pair of pants with a belt from a garbage can several houses down from where Vinson's body was found (and outside the ATF camera range). Forensic examination and DNA testing matched one blood spot on the pants to Vinson.
Following Appellants' separate indictments, the trial court joined the cases, ordered discovery, held pretrial conferences and hearings, and conducted a joint trial. During voir dire, the Commonwealth exercised four of its nine peremptory strikes to remove African-American potential jurors. Oldham and Lloyd moved to strike the jury based on Batson, 106 S. Ct. 1712. The trial court overruled the motion finding the overall circumstances insufficient to meet the defense's required prima facie burden.
Once the jury was seated, the case proceeded to trial. While testifying, Ashley and Noah had difficulty remembering the factual details from the joint interview with Detective Miracle at the police station. Noah and Ashley were both impeached with written transcripts from the recorded interview. Noah's testimony was further impeached with recordings from the joint interview.
Six days after the trial began, the Commonwealth produced previously-undisclosed arson investigation materials including 135 photographs taken by the Louisville Metro Police Arson Squad and a full police report for a burglary at Noah and Ashley's apartment. The original discovery the Commonwealth turned over to the defense mentioned the burglary, but failed to include the names of two uncharged suspects contained in the full police report.
The trial court heard Appellants' motions seeking discovery sanctions outside the presence of the jury. The court denied Appellants' motions to dismiss, continue, or declare a mistrial. The court found that the Commonwealth had committed discovery violations, but also found that theseviolations were not the product of bad faith. The trial court fashioned a remedy which allowed Appellants to use the materials as they saw fit and excluded the Commonwealth from using the materials altogether—even in the event that Appellants would have ordinarily been considered to have opened the door to the evidence. The trial court also limited Appellants' questioning of Detective Miracle regarding his failure to secure and place the materials in the homicide files.
At the conclusion of trial, Appellants were convicted and sentenced as previously noted. This appeal followed. Further background information will be developed as needed in our analysis.
Oldham and Lloyd first challenge the trial court's denial of their motions to strike the jury panel pursuant to Batson, 106 S. Ct. 1712. Appellants assert that the Commonwealth's use of more than 40% of its allotted peremptory strikes to remove African-American potential jurors was improper. Appellants also objected based on juror questioning and disparate use of strikes for similarly-situated jurors; however, the focal point of the motions and objections boiled down to the numbers. Oldham's counsel stated to the trial court, "the numbers speak for themselves." When asked by the court for a response to the numbers issue raised by the defense, the attorney for the Commonwealthreplied he had never been "Batson-ed" before and had not computed the numbers.
The United States Supreme Court set out a three-step process in Batson for determining if a violation occurred with the prosecution's strikes. Kentucky has repeatedly used this procedure and did so recently in Roe v. Commonwealth, 493 S.W.3d 814 (Ky. 2015). The initial burden is on the challenging party to make a prima facie case that a peremptory strike was based on race. Id. at 826. Once the judge finds that a prima facie case is made, then the prosecutor must offer a race-neutral basis for striking the juror in question. Id. Finally, the judge must decide if the defendant has shown purposeful discrimination. Id. at 826-27.
In analyzing this issue, the trial court reviewed the strike sheets, Batson's case requirements, and the Commonwealth's juror questioning and double-checked the math. After including the two alternates, the trial court calculated that the Commonwealth used forty-four percent of available strikes to remove African-American jurors. Of fourteen jurors selected to hear the case (including the two alternates), six were African-American and eight were white. In fact, the jury hearing the case had a higher percentage of African-American jurors than what comprised the jury pool from which it was selected. The trial court found that the Commonwealth's questions were evenly distributed between white and African-American jurors. After completing a review of thecircumstances and evidence, the trial court ruled the defense had not met its burden to establish a prima facie case under the first prong of Batson.
During the pendency of this case, the United States Supreme Court decided Flowers v. Mississippi, 139 S. Ct. 2228 (2019). The Court reviewed that case's long history of racially-tainted juror strikes under the 13th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution. Id. at 2238-41. The Court reiterated the Batson requirements, including the necessity of establishing a prima facie case of racially impermissible use of strikes before proceeding to the remaining prongs of the three-part analysis. Id. at 2243.
The Flowers Court reviewed the prima facie evidence in the record and noted that in each of the six trials that had taken place in that case, the prosecution struck as many African American jurors as it could—and in the sixth trial (the trial upon which that appeal was based) struck five out of six possible African American jurors. Id. at 2245. The record of the sixth trial reflected 145 questions asked of 5 black jurors and only 12 questions asked...
To continue reading
Request your trial