State v. Barksdale
Decision Date | 10 December 1979 |
Citation | 590 S.W.2d 931 |
Parties | STATE of Tennessee, Respondent, v. Robert Lee BARKSDALE, Petitioner. |
Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Walker Gwinn, Edward G. Thompson, Shelby County Public Defender, Memphis, for petitioner.
Michael J. Passino, Asst. Atty. Gen., William M. Leech, Jr., Atty. Gen. and Reporter, Nashville, for respondent.
OPINION
Robert Lee Barksdale was convicted in the Criminal Court of Shelby County of rape and was sentenced to serve thirty years and twenty-nine days in the state penitentiary. The conviction was affirmed by the Court of Criminal Appeals. We granted certiorari to review the holding by the Court of Criminal Appeals that questions asked by the prosecution of a psychiatrist concerning the dangers of the defendant's possible future conduct were not error and, if error, were not prejudicial to the appellant. We have concluded that the questions were improper and were prejudicial. Accordingly, we reverse the conviction and remand the cause for a new trial.
It is undisputed in the record that appellant committed the act which led to his indictment for rape. Appellant's sole defense to the charge was insanity at the time of the act. His proof on this issue consisted of the testimony of Dr. Gene Abel, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Tennessee and a staff psychiatrist at the Memphis Mental Health Institute. Dr. Abel testified that defendant suffers from a mental disease which manifests itself in the form of extreme sexual deviation, and that he was unable to control himself when he committed the rape. During the State's cross examination, the following occurred:
Q. If this jury should find this man not guilty by reason of insanity, can you assure us that he won't go out this afternoon and do it again?
BY MR. AXLEY (Continuing Cross-examination):
Q. Would you answer that? Do you want me to ask it again?
A. I know that I would be reluctant to release him today, because I feel he has a serious sexual problem, and I don't think he has received the treatment for that problem in the past, and I think he does need the treatment for that problem. And, I think if he does not receive the treatment for that problem, the odds are that he would get involved in this sexual behavior again, unless he was treated for it.
Q. And, your treatment is purely voluntarily (sic)?
A. That's correct.
Q. On an outpatient basis?
A. That's correct.
Q. Therefore, he is allowed to walk the streets?
A. That's correct.
The Court of Criminal Appeals was of the opinion the evidence "overwhelmingly supports the jury's verdict" in this case and concluded the testimony of Dr. Abel, though irrelevant, was not a material factor in the jury's decision and was harmless error. We do not agree.
An error may not be deemed harmless where there "is a reasonable possibility that the evidence complained of might have contributed to the conviction." Fahy v. Connecticut, 375 U.S. 85, 84 S.Ct. 229, 11 L.Ed.2d 17 (1963). Of similar import is Harrington v. State, 215 Tenn. 338, 385 S.W.2d 758 (1965), wherein it is pointed out that "The general test to be applied is whether the improper conduct could have affected the verdict to the prejudice of the defendant."
In this case, there never was any doubt that appellant committed rape. He never even challenged this fact, but undertook to prove that at the time of the rape, he was unable to conform his...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Provenzano v. Singletary
...new trial. Id. at 479. In reaching its conclusion, the Alabama court relied upon the Tennessee case argued by Petitioner. State v. Barksdale, 590 S.W.2d 931 (Tenn.1979). The Tennessee prosecutor, during cross-examination, specifically asked the defense's expert on mental disease, whether he......
-
Smith v. State
...on that possibility in closing argument." Berard, 486 So.2d at 479. The Supreme Court in Berard seemed to rely on State v. Barksdale, 590 S.W.2d 931, 933 (Tenn.1979), which reversed a conviction on facts similar to those in Berard. The Alabama Supreme Court further pointed out that Barksdal......
-
Ex parte Smith
...to the issue of punishment, which is an improper consideration at the guilt phase of the trial. Berard, at 479; see also, State v. Barksdale, 590 S.W.2d 931 (Tenn.1979). Accordingly, we hold both that the error involved in the prosecutor's argument would seriously affect the fairness and in......
-
Ex parte State
...possibility in closing argument. Our research has uncovered only one case which deals with this kind of situation. In State v. Barksdale, 590 S.W.2d 931 (Tenn.1979), the defendant had been charged with the crime of rape and had entered the plea of not guilty by reason of insanity. The psych......