State v. Featherman

Decision Date10 June 1982
Docket NumberNo. 1,CA-CR,1
Citation651 P.2d 868,133 Ariz. 340
PartiesSTATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. John J. FEATHERMAN, Appellant. 5042.
CourtArizona Court of Appeals
OPINION

FROEB, Judge.

The defendant was convicted of second degree murder in violation of former A.R.S. §§ 13-451, -452, -453 and -454, following a trial by jury, and was sentenced to serve a term of imprisonment in the Arizona State Prison of not less than 14 nor more than 45 years. He raises two issues for our consideration: whether the trial court erred in admitting evidence that the defendant had hit the victim over the head with a baseball bat two months prior to her disappearance, and whether the trial court erred in allowing the state to present testimony of specific violent acts committed by the defendant in rebuttal to the testimony of his character witnesses.

The evidence at trial revealed that: on April 2, 1977, a dead body was found by police detectives at 107th Avenue and Orangewood in Phoenix. The body was located in a wash in a garbage dump, and was observed by Detective Kinman lying face down, covered by a piece of cardboard and the backseat of a car. The Maricopa County Medical Examiner was called to the scene and determined that the body was female and in a highly decomposed state. The body was taken to the medical examiner's office for further examination, and was identified by dental records to be the remains of Twyla Featherman. The cause of death could not be determined due to the state of decomposition of the body.

Twyla Featherman had been reported to the Phoenix Police Department as missing on October 22, 1976. On November 11 1976, Detective Thompson of the Phoenix Police Department spoke with the defendant who, at that time, was the estranged husband of Twyla Featherman. The defendant told Detective Thompson that he had been with Twyla on the night of October 21, 1976, which was the night she disappeared. He said they had had some drinks and dinner, and then Twyla told the defendant that she wanted to go to the Neutral Corner Bar which was owned by the defendant. They arrived at the bar around 10:30 or 11:00 P.M., but found it to be closed. According to defendant, shortly after their arrival at the bar, Twyla stated that she had to leave and, after making a phone call, refused a ride from the defendant and left the bar on her own, never to be seen again. At the time the body of Twyla Featherman was discovered, some five and one-half months later on April 2, 1977, the defendant was vacationing in Las Vegas with his new wife, Glenda Featherman. When he returned and discovered that Twyla's body had been found, the defendant called the sheriff's office to advise them that he was available if needed. He was interviewed at the sheriff's office on April 13, 1977, and repeated the same story which he had told Detective Thompson in November 1976. At that time, he also told the sheriff's officers that his marriage to Twyla had been dissolved in December 1976 and that he had married Glenda Featherman in January 1977. He told the officers that his marriage to Twyla had been rocky and that he had "slapped her a few times."

On August 12, 1978, Glenda Featherman, then married to the defendant, contacted the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department advising them that she wished to make a statement regarding the disappearance of Twyla Featherman. After being granted use immunity by the County Attorney's Office, Glenda gave a statement to the sheriff's department implicating the defendant in the murder of Twyla Featherman. Glenda Featherman and the defendant were divorced on March 20, 1979.

At trial, Glenda Featherman gave lengthy testimony which we here only summarize. She testified that at 4:00 A.M., on October 22, 1976, she received a phone call from the defendant, whom she was dating at that time. He asked that she come to the Neutral Corner Bar. When she arrived there she saw the body of Twyla Featherman lying on the floor. Thereafter, Glenda helped the defendant dispose of Twyla's body at the dump at 107th Avenue and Orangewood. On the way home from the dump, the defendant explained to Glenda that he killed Twyla by pressing on pulse points at her temples until she lapsed into unconsciousness. He would allow her to return to consciousness and after he did this numerous times, she simply did not recover. In further testimony, Glenda Featherman related that she followed directions given to her by the defendant out of fear of his threats made against her and her son. After an incident in August 1978, she filed for divorce and following further threats against her life as well as her son, she finally went to the police and gave her story.

Misti Weaver, Twyla's daughter from a previous marriage who lived with the defendant and Twyla during their marriage, testified as follows:

A. Yes. They had a rocky marriage; they fought a lot. John would come home, beat her up after he went out, got drunk. Wake us kids up, beat her up.

Q. Did you see this?

A. Yes, quite a few times.

Q. When he would beat her up, what would he use? How would he be hitting her?

A. His fists.

Q. You say this happened quite a few times during the course of this marriage?

A. Yes.

Q. Towards the end of the marriage, in 1976, did the relationship between your mother and John Featherman change any?

A. It got worse.

Q. Did you see the signs of any injuries on your mother as a result of these beatings?

A. Yes, I did. Q. Misti, calling your attention to the latter part of August, 1976, around August 29 or August 30, 1976, did you and your mother finally--or did your mother finally move out of the house that she lived at with Johnny Featherman?

A. Yes, she did after he hit her over the head with a baseball bat.

On motion of defense counsel, the trial court ordered the statement concerning the baseball bat incident stricken and told the jury to disregard it. Defendant also moved for a mistrial on the grounds that the witness had not personally seen this event but had heard of it from another person and that it was a prior bad act and prejudicial. The trial court denied the defense motion for a mistrial based on the state's assertion that admissible evidence of the baseball bat incident would be presented. The court determined that proper evidence of the baseball bat incident would be admissible pursuant to rule 404(b), Rules of Evidence, to prove the defendant's intent and/or motive.

The next person to testify about the baseball bat incident was Sheri Savage, a friend of Twyla Featherman, who took Twyla to Phoenix Baptist Hospital in August 1976 for treatment of wounds to her head. Over the objection of the defendant, Savage testified that she had heard Twyla tell the doctor that her husband beat her on the head with a baseball bat. Savage also testified that within five days after this incident, she confronted the defendant with regard to the baseball bat incident:

Q. What did you say to him? What did he say to you regarding this baseball bat incident?

A. I asked him why he beat her in the head with a baseball bat. I told him that he could have killed her.

He told me that he wanted to kill her, that he was so upset with her, all he could see was her big mouth running. He walked in the family room, he picked up the baseball bat, he wanted to kill her, he was very upset with her. He said he could have put her body out in the desert and the police would have thought it was another sex slaying.

Q. Did he indicate to you why he was upset with her?

A. He said--I asked him if he was drinking, and he told me no, he hadn't been drinking; he was stone cold sober. But when he got home that morning, about four or five o'clock, whatever it was, she jumped on him, and they had an argument, and he lost his temper.

Q. Did he indicate to you what the argument was, if you can remember? Yes or no?

A. It was over another woman.

Savage also stated that approximately a week after she had taken Twyla to Phoenix Baptist Hospital, she took her to see a Dr. A. E. Zachow concerning the head injuries.

Dr. Zachow testified that he removed the sutures from Twyla's scalp on September 7, 1976. He recalled Twyla having said something to him to the effect that she had sustained the injuries while horseback riding. He did not recall a mention of the baseball bat and stated that if Twyla had mentioned a baseball bat, he would have suggested another form of treatment including X-rays. He also testified that the injuries which he saw on Twyla's head were not consistent with being struck on the head by a baseball bat because there was no indentation.

Dr. Melvin Phillips testified for the defense that he had known Twyla and the defendant for many years. He stated that he had never noticed any injuries on Twyla and that he had never seen the defendant do anything violent. He also never observed any sign that Twyla was afraid of the defendant. He examined the hospital records concerning Twyla's treatment for the head injury and stated that the records were not consistent with Twyla's having been hit on the head with a baseball bat.

John Featherman, Jr., the son of the defendant, testified in reference to the alleged baseball bat incident on cross-examination as follows:

Q. In fact, the day before she left, your father beat her, didn't he?

A. No Q. Do you recall you were cleaning up and placing her in the bath tub or helping your father place her in the bath tub so the blood wouldn't get all over the living room?

A. No.

Q. Do you recall telling Misti that?

A. No.

Q. Do you recall doing it?

A. I didn't do it.

Q. Do you recall telling Misti that that night you...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • State v. Smith
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • 15 Mayo 1987
    ...intent, malice, and motive for the homicide. See State v. Headley, 168 W.Va. 138, 142, 282 S.E.2d 872, 875 (1981); State v. Featherman, 133 Ariz. 340, 651 P.2d 868 (1982); White v. Arkansas, 290 Ark. 130, 717 S.W.2d 784 (1986); Alvin v. State, 253 Ga. 740, 325 S.E.2d 143 (1985); Jenkins v. ......
  • Stewart v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 22 Marzo 1996
    ...by contending that he accidentally shot the victim, placed his intent at the time of the murder at issue. "In State v. Featherman, 133 Ariz. 340, 651 P.2d 868 (Ariz.App.1982), the defendant was charged with murder, and evidence that the defendant had hit the victim in the head with a baseba......
  • Stewart v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 1 Mayo 1992
    ...by contending that he accidentally shot the victim, placed his intent at the time of the murder at issue. In State v. Featherman, 133 Ariz. 340, 651 P.2d 868 (Ariz.App.1982), the defendant was charged with murder, and evidence that the defendant had hit the victim in the head with a basebal......
  • State v. Wood
    • United States
    • Arizona Supreme Court
    • 11 Octubre 1994
    ...Debra were relevant to show his state of mind and thus were properly admitted under Rule 404(b). See State v. Featherman, 133 Ariz. 340, 344-45, 651 P.2d 868, 872-73 (Ct.App.1982) (evidence of prior assault on victim admissible to show defendant's intent in murder b. Hearsay statements of D......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Reviving hope for domestic violence prosecutions: Giles v. California.
    • United States
    • American Criminal Law Review Vol. 46 No. 3, June 2009
    • 22 Junio 2009
    ...221, 240 (1998)). (129.) Id. (130.) Id. (131.) Id. at 59. (132.) 593 A.2d 186, 195 (D.C. 1991). (133.) Id.; see also State v. Featherman, 651 P.2d 868, 873 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1982) (stating that understating the pattern of abuse in a relationship is important to prove both motive and intent); ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT