State v. Nunley
| Decision Date | 19 July 2011 |
| Docket Number | No. SC 76981.,SC 76981. |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri, Respondent,v.Roderick NUNLEY, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HEREWest CodenotesRecognized as UnconstitutionalV.A.M.S. § 565.030.4.
Michael J. Gorla, St. Louis, Jennifer Herndon, Florissant, Susan Hunt, Law Offices of Susan M. Hunt, Kansas City, for Nunley.Michael J. Spillane, Attorney General's Office, Jefferson City, for State.WILLIAM RAY PRICE, JR., Chief Justice.I. Introduction
Nunley pled guilty to first degree murder, armed criminal action, forcible rape, and kidnapping. He waived jury sentencing. He did so for strategic reasons because he was afraid that if he went before a jury, it might sentence him to death. The defendant's original guilty plea and jury sentencing waiver remained valid after his case was remanded for re-sentencing. Because of Nunley's guilty plea and waiver, Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584, 122 S.Ct. 2428, 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002), and State v. Whitfield, 107 S.W.3d 253, 265 (Mo. banc 2003), do not apply. In addition, this Court did not err in the proportionality review of the defendant's death sentence because the applicable law regarding proportionality review in State v. Deck, 303 S.W.3d 527 (Mo. banc 2010) (J. Stith concurring), and State v. Dorsey, 318 S.W.3d 648, 659 (Mo. banc 2010), is not retroactive. State v. Clay, No. SC78373, order dated December 9, 2010.
The motion to recall the mandate is overruled.
II. Facts and Procedure
Roderick Nunley committed first degree murder and received a death sentence. At his original plea hearing on January 28, 1991, Nunley gave his version of the murder:
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Q; And then you took those two knives back down to the garage where Michael Taylor was; is that correct?
...
...
...
At the plea hearing, Nunley also testified that he knew he was waiving a jury trial and jury sentencing:
...
...
After a three day sentencing hearing, the judge sentenced Nunley to death.
Nunley filed a Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief that was overruled. Nunley then appealed. This Court vacated the death sentence and remanded the case for a “new penalty hearing, imposition of sentence, and entry of new judgment.”
The original judge recused, and Judge O'Malley was assigned to Nunley's case. Nunley filed a motion to withdraw his guilty plea under Rule 29.07, and the motion was overruled. Nunley then filed a motion for reconsideration or, in the alternative, jury sentencing. Nunley received a hearing on his motion to withdraw his plea on January 26, 1994. At the hearing, Nunley answered the following questions from the State:
...
...
...
...
...
...
Judge O'Malley overruled Nunley's motion for reconsideration. A sentencing hearing was conducted in April 1994. At the hearing, the State presented a witness from the victim's family, testimony from officers who investigated the murder, testimony from a forensic chemist who worked on the case, testimony from the officers who apprehended Nunley, evidence of the autopsy results, and a witness who testified that Nunley confessed the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Wood
...because it is not a factual finding that increases the potential range of punishment ." (Emphasis added). Similarly, in State v. Nunley , 341 S.W.3d 611, 626 n.3 (Mo. banc 2011), this Court noted a number of federal and state cases holding the weighing step is not a factual determination im......
-
Deck v. Steele
...See State v. Davis , 318 S.W.3d 618, 645 (Mo. banc 2010) ; State v. Dorsey , 318 S.W.3d 648, 659 (Mo. banc 2010). In State v. Nunley , 341 S.W.3d 611 (Mo. banc 2011), the supreme court specifically held that this new construction of the State statute was not to be applied retroactively. Id.......
-
State Ex Rel. Michael Anthony Taylor v. Steele
...Const. art. V, sec. 4. 3. Taylor's accomplice in Ann's death is the subject of the opinion released concurrent to this opinion, State v. Nunley, 341 S.W.3d 611 (Mo. banc 2011). 4. Taylor's 1994 sentences included death for Ann's murder and consecutive terms of 50 years for armed criminal ac......
-
State v. Minor
...that are not supported in the argument portion of the brief are deemed abandoned and preserve nothing for appellate review." State v. Nunley , 341 S.W.3d 611, 623 (Mo. banc 2011).3 Defendant cites State v. Gates , 635 S.W.3d 854, 857 n.4 (Mo. banc 2021), asserting that this Court should not......