State v. Hale
| Decision Date | 15 July 2008 |
| Docket Number | No. 2005-1678.,2005-1678. |
| Citation | 892 N.E.2d 864,119 Ohio St.3d 118,2008 Ohio 3426 |
| Parties | The STATE of Ohio, Appellee, v. HALE, Appellant. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Timothy Young, Ohio Public Defender, Kelly L. Culshaw, Supervisor, Death Penalty Division, and Ruth L. Tkacz and Kimberly S. Rigby, Assistant Public Defenders, for appellant.
William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Jon W. Oebker, Blaise D. Thomas, and Jennifer A. Driscoll, Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys, for appellee.
{¶ 1} On June 21, 2004, defendant-appellant Delano Hale Jr. killed Douglas Green by firing four bullets into his head. He then stole Green's Visa card and SUV. Hale was convicted of aggravated murder with an aggravated-robbery specification and was sentenced to death.
{¶ 2} In 2003, Hale was released from prison after serving 12 years of a sentence for aggravated robbery and carrying a concealed weapon. At first, he lived with his father, but left in February 2004. That same month, he obtained a telemarketing job with a base pay of $7.64 per hour. On March 9, 2004, Hale told his sister Lashayla that he had a gun.
{¶ 3} By June 2004, Hale was in financial difficulty. His bank account had a negative balance during all of June 2004. On June 8, he moved into Room 260 of the Lake Erie Lodge, a motel in Euclid. He initially rented the room for a week. He renewed his stay for another week on June 15, renewed for a single night on June 22, and checked out on June 23.
{¶ 4} On June 23, 2004, an employee of the lodge found a human corpse wrapped in plastic garbage bags in Room 231, a vacant room being used for storage. He notified the management, who summoned the police. The body was identified as that of Douglas Green, a local voice teacher, professional singer, and music producer.
{¶ 5} An autopsy disclosed that Green had been shot four times in the right side of the head. Two shots went into Green's right ear, one entered his skull directly behind the ear, and one entered about two and one-half inches behind the ear. Three of the four shots entered Green's brain. Any one of these three wounds would have immediately stopped any voluntary movement on Green's part. Three of the wounds were contact wounds, meaning that the shots were fired from no more than an inch away. Gunshot residue was found on Green's right hand, but not his left, an indication that Green's right hand was in close proximity to the gun when it was fired.
{¶ 6} Green's bank statement shows that at 12:07 p.m. on June 22, 2004, a person using Green's Visa card made a $55.15 purchase at a Giant Eagle store in Willoughby Hills. Giant Eagle records show that the purchaser bought garbage bags, cleaning supplies, beer, and cigarettes in that transaction. Green did not smoke or drink beer. The purchaser also used a Giant Eagle discount card registered to Hale's sister and deceased mother.
{¶ 7} Hale's friend James Hull saw Hale driving a Explorer SUV on two occasions after Green's murder, including on June 23, 2004, when Hull helped Hale move out of the lodge. Hull later identified photographs of Green's SUV as the one Hale had been driving.
{¶ 8} On June 28, 2004, at 2:30 p.m., Detective Sergeant Robert Pestak of the Euclid police found Hale inside Green's Ford Explorer SUV, parked near Hale's workplace in Cleveland. Pestak, supported by Cleveland police units, arrested Hale.
{¶ 9} When told that he was being arrested for Green's murder, Hale said, "I didn't kill anybody." Sergeant Pestak administered Miranda warnings to Hale. While being led to a cruiser, Hale again said, "I didn't kill anybody."
{¶ 10} Hale was taken to the Euclid police station and placed in a cell. After approximately five hours, Hale was removed from the cell and brought to the detective bureau. There, Detective Sergeant James Baird completed a personal-information form on Hale and presented it to Hale for his signature. Hale signed the form using his left hand, but Baird noted that Hale had difficulty writing with that hand.
{¶ 11} Baird then administered Miranda warnings to Hale. Hale signed a Miranda waiver form, and this time, Hale used his right hand. Baird proceeded to interrogate Hale. During the interrogation, Baird told Hale that Green "was possibly bisexual" and that "if this was a case of self-defense, then that would be understandable if he felt that Mr. Green had attacked him."
{¶ 12} Hale wrote out and signed a four-page statement. In his statement, Hale claimed that he had met Green in May 2004 when Green, identifying himself as a record producer, asked Hale whether he had considered singing professionally and gave Hale his cell-phone number. According to Hale, he later called Green, and Green agreed to go to Hale's motel room to hear him sing.
{¶ 13} According to Hale, they had arranged to meet at the Underground Railroad, a bar near the lodge. Hale claimed that he and Green had met at the Underground Railroad on Monday, June 21, 2004. (However, according to the owner of the Underground Railroad, that establishment was closed on Mondays.) They then went to Hale's room. According to Hale, Green had a small gun in his shoulder bag and displayed it to Hale as they entered the room.
{¶ 14} Hale claimed that he sang for Green, then went to the bathroom. Hale claimed that when he returned, he found Green lying on the bed, nude. Hale told Green to leave. According to Hale, Green grabbed Hale's wrists and "laid his head on [Hale's] crotch" while making "slurping" noises.
{¶ 15} Hale claimed that he then freed his right hand, reached into Green's bag, pulled out the gun, held it to Green's head, and cocked it. According to Hale, Green said, "It isn't loaded, so why don't you give me some of that dick."
{¶ 16} Hale fired. Green "reeled back," but still gripped Hale's left wrist, according to Hale. Hale cocked the gun and fired again. He then backed away from Green, took some bullets from Green's bag, and reloaded. According to Hale, Green then tried to stand up. Hale fired "once or twice" more.
{¶ 17} According to Hale, he considered calling an ambulance or the police, but decided not to after he "thought about * * * [his] record" and "the life [he] was attempting to build." Instead, he disposed of the gun and Green's belongings. Then he went out to buy cleaning supplies to clean up Green's blood, using Green's credit card because Hale's "funds were low." The next day, he wrapped Green's body in garbage bags, also purchased with Green's credit card, and dragged the body to a storage room.
{¶ 18} Hale was indicted on two counts of aggravated murder: one under R.C. 2903.01(A) and one under R.C. 2903.01(B). Each count carried a felony-murder death specification alleging murder during a robbery. Other counts charged aggravated robbery, tampering with evidence, and having a weapon while under disability.1 Hale argued self-defense, contending that Green had sexually assaulted him and that Hale had shot him to keep from being raped.
{¶ 19} On June 7, 2005, Hale was convicted of all counts and specifications, and he was sentenced to death for the aggravated murder of Green. He appeals his convictions and death sentence, raising 22 propositions of law for our review.
{¶ 20} In his third proposition of law, Hale contends that the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress the oral and written statements he gave Sergeant Baird on June 28, 2004.
{¶ 21} Sergeant Baird initially questioned Hale in order to obtain his personal information before administering Miranda2 warnings. Only after giving the Miranda warnings did Baird interrogate Hale about the murder. In response to Baird's post-Miranda interrogation, Hale gave Baird both oral and written statements admitting that he had killed Green and setting forth his version of the killing.
{¶ 22} Hale argues that because Baird had asked him questions before giving Miranda warnings — even though the pre-Miranda questions did not deal with the murder in any way — his oral and written statements about the murder should have been suppressed.
{¶ 23} The record of the suppression hearing establishes the following sequence of events:
{¶ 24} Sergeant Pestak arrested Hale at approximately 2:30 p.m., June 28, and informed Hale of his Miranda rights, which Sergeant Pestak recited from memory. Hale was then driven to the Euclid police station, arriving at 3:35 p.m. Before his shift ended at 5:00 p.m., Sergeant Pestak asked Sergeant Baird to "get a personal history" from Hale.
{¶ 25} Pestak's request referred to the standard personal-history form used by the Euclid detective bureau. The form contains such information as the arrestee's name, address, age, phone number, Social Security number, physical description, employer, education, and the names of his immediate family members. The detective bureau routinely obtains this information from every felony suspect and uses it to complete the form. The bureau gathers this information for police records and to verify the arrestee's identity.
{¶ 26} At 7:50 p.m., Baird had Hale escorted from his cell to the detective bureau. For 20 to 25 minutes, Baird questioned Hale to obtain information for the personal-history form.
{¶ 27} When questioning finished, Baird told Hale that Baird "was going to talk to him briefly about the crime that he was being charged with, and that before [Baird] asked him any questions or talked to him at all about it, that [Baird] had to advise him of his rights." Baird asked Hale to read a form containing the Miranda warnings. Baird then read the Miranda form aloud to him. Baird asked if Hale understood his rights. Hale said yes and signed the form, acknowledging that he understood them. Baird then showed Hale the waiver portion of the Miranda form and told Hale that if he wanted to talk to Baird, he needed to sign the waiver. Hale signed the Miranda waiver at 8:22 p.m.
{¶ 28} Baird explained to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Leonard v. Warden
... Patrick Leonard, Petitioner, v. Warden, Ohio State Penitentiary, Respondent. Case No. 1:09-cv-056 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION May 14, 2015 Chief ... Page 44 Ohio v. Getsy , 84 Ohio St. 3d 180, 201 (1998); Ohio v. Hale , 119 Ohio St. 3d 118, 140 (2008). At the penalty phase of a capital trial, counsel for the state is permitted to raise and address any evidence that ... ...
-
State v. Graham
... ... When a capital defendant is accused of interracial murder, defense counsel are "entitled to engage in racial-bias inquiry," but they are not required to do so. (Emphasis deleted.) State v. Hale , 119 Ohio St.3d 118, 2008-Ohio-3426, 892 N.E.2d 864, 217-218. As we have explained, "the actual decision to question on racial prejudice is a choice best left to a capital defendant's counsel." State v. Conway , 108 Ohio St.3d 214, 2006-Ohio-791, 842 N.E.2d 996, 33. Counsel has to "weigh the ... ...
-
State v. Grate
... ... Yet the Rules of Evidence, including the hearsay rules, still apply to mitigation-phase hearings. See State v. Williams , 73 Ohio St.3d 153, 159, 652 N.E.2d 721 (1995) ; State v. Jalowiec , 91 Ohio St.3d 220, 233, 744 N.E.2d 163 (2001) ; State v. Hale , 119 Ohio St.3d 118, 2008-Ohio-3426, 892 N.E.2d 864, 128. { 159} Charter testified that their mother had been sexually abused and that the home that they had been living in caught on fire. Although the trial court excluded the testimony because Charter lacked first-hand knowledge of the ... ...
-
Richardson v. Smith
... ... 2903.01(A). On October 16, 2006, the state filed a "Notice of Intent to Use Evidence," pursuant to Evid. R. 12(D). The evidence in question related to a reported incident in May 2006, during ... " State v ... Davis , 116 Ohio St.3d 404, 2008-Ohio-2, 148, citing State v ... Baston (1999), 85 Ohio St.3d 418, 423; State v ... Hale , 119 Ohio St.3d 118, 2008-Ohio-3426, 54. As with other evidentiary rulings, the trial court's determination that a witness is qualified as an ... ...
-
Witnesses
...plaintiff was not suffering from those conditions, or to offer a different diagnosis to explain plaintiff’s evidence. State v. Hale , 892 N.E.2d 864 (Ohio 2008). A defendant asserting self-defense cannot introduce evidence of specific instances of a victim’s conduct to prove that the victim......
-
Witnesses
...plaintiff was not suffering from those conditions, or to offer a different diagnosis to explain plaintiff’s evidence. State v. Hale , 892 N.E.2d 864 (Ohio 2008). A defendant asserting self-defense cannot introduce evidence of specific instances of a victim’s conduct to prove that the victim......
-
Witnesses
...that plainti൵ was not su൵ering from those conditions, or to o൵er a di൵erent diagnosis to explain plainti൵’s evidence. State v. Hale , 892 N.E.2d 864 (Ohio 2008). A defendant asserting self-defense cannot introduce evidence of speciic instances of a victim’s conduct to prove that the victim ......
-
Witnesses
...that plainti൵ was not su൵ering from those conditions, or to o൵er a di൵erent diagnosis to explain plainti൵’s evidence. State v. Hale , 892 N.E.2d 864 (Ohio 2008). A defendant asserting self-defense cannot introduce evidence of speciic instances of a victim’s conduct to prove that the victim ......