Richardson v. State
| Citation | 376 So.2d 205 |
| Decision Date | 03 October 1978 |
| Docket Number | 4 Div. 624 |
| Parties | Herbert Lee RICHARDSON v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Daniel E. Robison, Dothan, for appellant.
William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen., and Samuel J. Clenney, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State, appellee.
Appellant was convicted of murder and the jury fixed his punishment at death. He was represented by court-appointed counsel and at arraignment pleaded not guilty. He and his attorney signed a written waiver for a special venire and agreed to strike a jury from the regular panel drawn for the week appellant's case was set for trial.
Appellant was tried on count one of the indictment which, omitting the formal parts, reads as follows:
"The Grand Jury of said County charge that, before the finding of this Indictment Herbert Lee Richardson, whose name is to the Grand Jury otherwise unknown, did unlawfully and with malice aforethought, willfully set off or explode dynamite or other explosives in, under, or dangerously near an inhabited dwelling house in which a human being was lodged, to-wit: Rena Mae Callins, and a person, Rena Mae Callins was intentionally killed by Herbert Lee Richardson because of said explosion, against the peace and dignity of the State of Alabama."
The State filed a motion to dismiss counts two and three of the indictment and this motion was granted.
Appellant filed a motion to suppress the evidence; a motion to quash the indictment; a motion to suppress certain photographs, and a motion to produce certain documents and other information. All of these motions were heard and denied by the trial court on January 20, 1978, with the exception of the motion to produce which was granted.
In connection with the motion to suppress the photographs appellant filed the following stipulation:
"Comes now the defendant in the above styled cause and does hereby stipulate that the said Rena Mae Callins was killed on the 16th day of August, 1977, as the proximate result of an explosive device and that said explosive device caused severe and fatal damage to the said Rena Mae Callins' body."
Accompanying the above stipulation was the following motion:
"Comes now the defendant, Herbert Lee Richardson, having heretofore stipulated that Rena Mae Callins was killed on the 16th day of August, 1977, as a proximate result of the explosion of an explosive device and that said explosive device caused severe and fatal damage to the "1. The said photographs are irrelevant and immaterial to the issues in the trial of this cause.
said Rena Mae Callins' body, and hereby moves to suppress the introduction of certain photographs in the possession of the Honorable Tom Sorrells, District Attorney of Houston County, Alabama, said photographs depicting the body of Rena Mae Callins after the explosion of said explosive device and as grounds therefor says as follows:
The photographs were taken at the scene of the explosion by Officer Larry Lynn of the Dothan Police Department. They depict the body of Rena Mae Callins from several different angles, revealing the massive and extensive damage caused by the explosive device. One photograph taken of the deceased's head from the direction of the blast was kept from the jury by the trial court. Three photographs of the victim were admitted into evidence, including one close-up of the victim's upper torso. Two other photographs show the victim's brain lying almost intact at her feet.
It is settled law in this State that gruesome, even ghastly and unsightly, photographs properly identified and authenticated are admissible if they tend to shed light on, strengthen or illustrate the truth of other testimony. Hurst v. State, 54 Ala.App. 254, 307 So.2d 62; Lewis v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 339 So.2d 1035.
Such photographs are admissible for the purpose of shedding light on the character and location of the wounds on the body of the victim. Cole v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 337 So.2d 40; Balentine v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 339 So.2d 1063.
In Lewis v. State, supra, this Court held in an opinion by Judge Bookout:
On January 11, 1978, appellant filed the following motion:
". . . Comes now the defendant in the above styled cause and moves to suppress as evidence to be used in the trial in the above styled cause on January 23, 1978, all items seized under the authority of certain searches of the defendant's vehicle and home, said searches having occurred on August 16, 1977, a copy of said search warrants and returns being attached hereto and marked Exhibit 'A' and 'B' respectively, and as grounds therefor the defendant says as follows:
1.
"Said search warrants were issued in violation of Title 15, Chapter 5, Section (Sections) 2 and 3 of the Code of Alabama, 1975.
2.
"Said search warrants were issued in violation of Section 5, Constitution of Alabama of 1901 and Amendment IV, Constitution of the United States.
3.
"For the said search warrants were issued without probable cause.
4.
"For the affidavit in support of said search warrants is legally insufficient to justify the issuance of the subject search warrants."
This motion was heard by the trial court on January 20, 1978. The evidence adduced at that time is fully set out below.
Jimmy Hand testified that he was employed by the Sheriff's Department in Geneva, Alabama. On August 16, 1977, Hand appeared before Judge Black, the Geneva County District Judge, for the purpose of obtaining a search warrant in the case at bar.
The following are the affidavits, filed by Hand, and the warrant, issued thereon:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Roberts v. State
...the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and the appellate court adequately review his sentencing decision.'" Richardson v. State, 376 So.2d 205, 224 (Ala.Cr.App.1978), aff'd, 376 So.2d 228 In capital cases, the sentencing body may not be precluded from considering any relevant mitigat......
-
Vogel v. State
...with exigent circumstances, and in stop and frisk situations. Daniels v. State, 290 Ala. 316, 276 So.2d 441 (1973); Richardson v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 376 So.2d 205 (1978), affirmed, Ala., 376 So.2d 228 (1979); Baker v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 340 So.2d 854, cert. denied, Ala., 340 So.2d 860 (19......
-
Hallford v. State, 4 Div. 913
...v. Ventresca, 380 U.S. 102, 85 S.Ct. 741, 13 L.Ed.2d 684 (1965); United States v. Reed, 700 F.2d 638 (11th Cir.1983); Richardson v. State, 376 So.2d 205 (Ala.Cr.App.1978), aff'd, 376 So.2d 228 The motel room occupied by appellant was registered in the name of James Boyington. The record sho......
-
Cochran v. State
...cert. denied, 433 U.S. 915, 97 S.Ct. 2988, 53 L.Ed.2d 1101 (1977) ] )." This language was quoted with approval in Richardson v. State, 376 So.2d 205, 224 (Ala.Cr.App.1978), affirmed, 376 So.2d 228 (Ala.1979). In his concurring opinion in Cook v. State, 369 So.2d 1251, 1260 (Ala.1978), Justi......