Owens v State
| Decision Date | 01 September 1999 |
| Docket Number | 9806-CR-00182 |
| Citation | 13 S.W.3d 742 |
| Parties | GAILE K. OWENS, Appellant, vs. STATE OF TENNESSEE, Appellee.IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON |
| Court | Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals |
SHELBY COUNTY
(Post-Conviction, Capital Case)
In this capital case, the appellant, Gaile K. Owens, appeals as of right the judgment of the Criminal Court of Shelby County denying her petition for post-conviction relief. In 1986, the appellant was convicted of accessory before the fact to first degree murder. In a joint trial, the appellant's co-defendant, Sidney Porterfield, was also convicted of first degree murder and following a separate sentencing hearing, both were sentenced to death by electrocution. The appellant's conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal by the Tennessee Supreme Court. See State v. Porterfield, 746 S.W.2d 441 (Tenn.), reh'g denied, (1988), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1017, 108 S.Ct. 1756 (1988).
For the Appellant:
Paul J. Morrow, Jr., Staff Attorney, Post-Conviction Defender, 460 James Robertson Parkway, 2nd Floor, Nashville, TN 37243-0505
For the Appellee:
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter, Michael E. Moore, Solicitor General, Alice B. Lustre, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Justice Division, 425 Fifth Avenue North, 2d Floor, Cordell Hull Building, Nashville, TN 37243-0493
AFFIRMED
The appellant filed the instant petition on February 28, 1991. The post-conviction court denied the appellant's ex parte request for expert services. Through an interlocutory appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court, the appellant was granted the funds for expert services. See Owens v. State, 908 S.W.2d 923 (Tenn. 1995). An amended petition was filed on August 15, 1996. A hearing was held on September 22, 1997. On May 4, 1998, the post-conviction court entered an order denying the appellant post-conviction relief.
On appeal, the appellant raises the following issues:
I. Whether the appellant received the effective assistance of counsel at trial;
II. Whether the judge at the post-conviction proceeding, formerly an assistant district attorney who worked in the office which tried the appellant, should have recused himself;
III. Whether the appellant was denied her constitutional rights during the guilt and sentencing phases by the prosecution's failure to provide the defense exculpatory evidence;
IV. Whether the heinous, atrocious, and cruel aggravator was appropriately applied vicariously to the appellant and whether the trial court should have instructed that the appellant intended to inflict the heinous, atrocious, and cruel act;
V. Whether the murder for remuneration aggravating circumstance sufficiently narrows the class of death eligible offenders;
VI. Whether the reasonable doubt jury instructions given at both stages of the trial were constitutional; and
VII. Whether Tennessee's death penalty statutes are constitutional.
After reviewing the record, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
The proof, as set forth in the supreme court's decision, State v. Porterfield, 746 S.W.2d at 443-445, established the following pertinent facts:
The evidence shows that over a period of months, Mrs. Owens solicited several men to kill her husband. One of these men was Sidney Porterfield. She met with him on at least three occasions, the last being at 2:30 p.m. on Sunday, February 17, 1985. At that time, she told him that her husband would either be home alone that night or would be at the church playing basketball.
That evening Mr. and Mrs. Owens and their two sons attended evening church services. Afterwards, when Mr. Owens remained at church to play basketball, the boys asked, as they usually did, to stay with their father. Mrs. Owens refused their request and took them to a restaurant for dinner and then to the home of Mrs. Owens' sister, where they stayed until approximately 10:30 p.m. When they arrived home at about 11:00 p.m. Mr. Owens' automobile was in the driveway. The doors were open, the interior light was on and Mr. Owens' coat and tie were on the seat. They found the back door to the house partially open, and the keys in the lock. There were signs of a struggle in the kitchen and blood was splattered on the wall and floor. Mr. Owens was found in the den unconscious, his head covered with blood. Mr. Owens died some six hours later from multiple blows to his head.
The autopsy revealed that Mr. Owens had been struck at least twenty_one times with a blunt instrument, described by the forensic pathologist as a long, striated cylinder such as a tire iron. The blows had driven his face into the floor, crushed his skull and driven bone fragments into his brain. Mr. Owens also had sustained extensive injuries to his hands and strands of hair between his fingers indicated he had been covering his head with his hands when he was beaten.
After the killing, George James, one of the men solicited by Mrs. Owens to kill her husband, contacted the police and told them of Mrs. Owens' offer. James then assisted the police by permitting them to record telephone conversations he had with Mrs. Owens. After one of the calls, James met Mrs. Owens in the Raleigh Springs Mall in Memphis. James was wearing a hidden body microphone, which was being monitored by police in a nearby automobile. Mrs. Owens paid James sixty dollars to keep quiet, telling him that it was all the money she had. She also stated that she had had her husband killed because of "bad marital problems." Mrs. Owens was placed under arrest at the conclusion of her meeting with Mr. James.
At first, Mrs. Owens claimed that she only had hired people to follow her husband and "to rough him up." She did admit paying out some $ 4,000 to $ 5,000 to various men for expenses. Later she confessed to offering three men $ 5,000 to $ 10,000 to kill her husband and to talking with a man known as "little Johnny" at 2:30 p.m. on the day of the murder about killing her husband. She had promised to pay him three or four days after the murder. When asked why, Mrs. Owens stated,
The man who met Mrs. Owens on Sunday afternoon was identified by witnesses as Sidney Porterfield. A witness also placed Mr. Porterfield in the vicinity of the Owens' house a week before the killing.
Mr. Porterfield also made a statement to the police which was entered into evidence. According to Mr. Porterfield, he met with Mrs. Owens on three occasions to discuss plans for the killing of Mr. Owens, the last being at 2:30 p.m. on Sunday, February 17, 1985. He stated that Mrs. Owens offered him $ 17,000 to kill her husband, and that he told her he would have to check out the situation. (Shortly after her husband's funeral Mrs. Owens had asked her father_in law for $ 17,000 "to pay some bills.") He further stated that he went to the Owens' house that evening at about 9:00 p.m. On leaving his automobile, he put a tire iron in his pocket in case he encountered a dog. Porterfield stated he was walking in the back yard of the Owens' house when Mr. Owens came home; that Mr. Owens would not accept his explanation that he was looking for a house, but informed him he was going to hold him until the police arrived; that Mr. Owens grabbed him by the arm and attempted to pull him into the house. According to Porterfield, Mr. Owens had a brief case in one hand and was grasping Porterfield with the other. (No attempt was made to explain how Mr. Owens, with his hands thus occupied, unlocked the door to the house.) Porterfield said he tried to break away and, when he was unsuccessful, struck Mr. Owens with the tire iron. The men were then in the kitchen. Mr. Owens threw his hand up for protection, but would not release Mr. Porterfield. Porterfield then continued to strike Mr. Owens with the tire iron, with the result that he did extensive damage to both of Mr. Owens' hands and to his head. On leaving the Owens' house, Mr. Porterfield threw the tire iron and the gloves he was wearing into a dumpster. They were never recovered.
Defendant Porterfield offered no evidence in his defense. Mrs. Owens presented the testimony of a neighbor, who testified that Mrs. Owens was almost hysterical after her husband was found. A funeral home employee also testified. He stated that a large balance was owing on Mr. Owens' funeral bill, presumably to show that Mrs. Owens did have large debts to pay after her husband's death as she had represented to her father_in_law in attempting to secure a loan.
. . .
In the bifurcated sentencing hearing, the forensic pathologist again testified for the state concerning the circumstances of Mr. Owens' death, such as blood being inhaled, bone fragments being driven into his brain, and the fact that Mr. Owens had lived six hours after the beating. Two photographs showing the head wounds suffered by Mr. Owens also were introduced.
In addition, the state presented proof that Mr. Porterfield had been convicted of robbery with a deadly weapon in 1968 and of simple robbery twice in 1971. The state also relied on the circumstances of the killing as shown by evidence in the guilt phase of the trial.
In mitigation, the defendant Owens presented evidence that she had been treated by a psychiatrist on one occasion in 1978 for severe behavioral problems. She also called two jail employees who testified that Mrs. Owens was a good prisoner who caused no problems, volunteered to work, and attended Bible study classes. Mr. Porterfield presented no evidence in mitigation.
In imposing the sentence of death, the jury found three aggravating circumstances with respect to Porterfield, and two with respect to Mrs. Owens. No mitigating circumstances were found. Specifically, the jury found that Mr. Porterfield (1) had been...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Austin
... ... § 39-2404(i)(4) achieves the constitutionally required narrowing of death eligible defendants even where the conviction is based on the defendant's role as an accessory before the fact. See Owens v. State, 13 S.W.3d 742, 764-765 (Tenn.Crim. App.1999), perm. to appeal denied, (Tenn.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 846, 121 S.Ct. 116, 148 L.Ed.2d 73 (2000). For these reasons, the Appellant is denied relief on this claim ... Propriety of Court's Refusal to Impose Life Sentence Due to ... ...
-
State v. Vela
... ... at 138, 107 S.Ct. 1676 ... 76. Id., 481 U.S. at 157-58, 107 S.Ct. 1676 ... 77. Id., 481 U.S. at 158, 107 S.Ct. 1676 ... 78. State v. Peeler, 271 Conn. 338, 857 A.2d 808 (2004) ... 79. Id. at 444, 857 A.2d at 876 ... 80. Id. at 445, 857 A.2d at 876 ... 81. Owens v. State, 13 S.W.3d 742 (Tenn.Crim. App.1999) ... 82. Selsor v. State, 2 P.3d 344, 353 (Okla.Crim. App.2000) ... 83. Neb.Rev.Stat. § 28-206 (Reissue 2008) (emphasis supplied) ... 84. State v. Barfield, 272 Neb. 502, 723 N.W.2d 303 (2006), disapproved on other grounds, State v ... ...
-
State v. Torres
... ... Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-204 (c) (1993); State v. Hall, 8 S.W.3d 593, 602 (Tenn. 1999), cert. denied, U.S. , 121 S. Ct. 98 (2000); Owens v. State, 13 S.W.3d 742, 756 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999), perm. to appeal denied, (Tenn.), cert. denied, U.S. , 121 S. Ct. 116 (2000); State v. Vincent C. Sims, No. W1998-00634-CCA-R3-DD, 2000 WL 298901, at *19 (Tenn. Crim. App. at Jackson, March 14, 2000); see also Tenn. R. App. P. 36(a) ... ...
-
State v. Copeland, No. E2002-01123-CCA-R3-DD (TN 8/22/2005)
... ... solicits, directs, aids, or attempts to aid another person to commit the offense), the (I)(2) factor may not be applicable in the present case in view of the defendant's possible complicity or vicarious criminal liability. In Owens v. State, 13 S.W.3d 742 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999), this court said that "[c]ertain aggravators focus clearly on the defendant's own actions or intent and contemplate consideration of the defendant's individual actions in determining the most culpable capital defendants. Alternatively, other ... ...