State v. Ratliff

• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: Cynthia L. Martin, Judge
• Citation: State v. Ratliff, 622 S.W.3d 736 (Mo. App. 2021)
• Decision Date: 18 May 2021
• Docket Number: WD 83435
• Parties: STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Larry D. RATLIFF, Appellant.

622 S.W.3d 736

STATE of Missouri, Respondent,

v.Larry D. RATLIFF, Appellant.

WD 83435

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

OPINION FILED: May 18, 2021

Dora Fichter, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.

Damien De Loyola, Kansas City, MO, for appellant.

Before Division Four: Cynthia L. Martin, Chief Judge, Presiding, Lisa White Hardwick, Judge and W. Douglas Thomson, Judge

Cynthia L. Martin, Judge

Larry D. Ratliff ("Ratliff") appeals from a judgment convicting him of murder in the first degree and armed criminal action. Ratliff argues that the trial court abused its discretion in allowing a police detective to give a lay witness opinion concerning Ratliff's mental health status during an interview because the jurors were able to form an opinion for themselves when the video of the interview was played for the jury. Ratliff also argues that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding evidence of his 1988 suicide attempt because the evidence was admissible and relevant, and because Ratliff had no duty to disclose that anticipated testimony to the prosecution in advance of trial. Finding no prejudicial error, we affirm.

Factual and Procedural Background

Ratliff does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to support his convictions of murder in the first degree and armed criminal action. Viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict,¹ the evidence established that on January 4, 2016, Ratliff killed his wife ("the Victim") by stabbing her four times. Ratliff does not dispute this fact. Instead, he argues that the errors about which he complains on appeal caused the jury to convict him of murder in the first degree instead of murder in the second degree.

Ratliff and the Victim were married for forty-seven years, but they separated in December 2015. After Ratliff and the Victim separated, the Victim stayed at her sister's house. A few days before he killed his wife, Ratliff set fire to the marital home in order to receive the insurance on the home. Ratliff testified that the Victim wanted $80,000, half of the value of the property, in the divorce, and that he intended to pay her this amount from the insurance proceeds. After the house fire, Ratliff stayed in a hotel provided by the insurance company.

After their separation, Ratliff stalked the Victim at her sister's house in the weeks before the murder, and even purchased binoculars to watch her from afar. Ratliff testified that he was careful to conceal his location and identity because he did not want to scare her. On one occasion, he rented a vehicle so she would not recognize his truck. Sometimes Ratliff would sit inside of his own truck, parked a distance from the house. On two or three occasions, Ratliff sat inside of a blue truck that was parked in his sister-in-law's backyard.

On the evening of January 3, 2016, Ratliff drove his truck to a location near his sister-in-law's house and sat there for thirty-five minutes. He then went back to his hotel room and wrote a note addressed to his children and grandchildren, which read:

With all my heart I love each and every one of you. I have such a hole in my heart and soul since your mother left me and I can never be with her again. I cannot live another day or night with this pain that is ... unbearable[.] [My] soul, my thoughts, my total reason for living.... Please try to get along as best you can and love each other without hurting each other. Remember, your mother just lost her heart for me. It's not her fault, but we cannot go on without each other. Love, love, Dad.

At 1:00 a.m. on January 4, 2016, Ratliff drove his truck back to his sister-in-law's house and sat outside for thirty minutes before returning to the hotel.

Later that morning, Ratliff once again drove back to his sister-in-law's house. He testified that he had a meeting planned with the insurance adjuster concerning the house fire that morning, and he wanted to speak with the Victim because her name was on the deed to the house. Ratliff parked his truck at the edge of a field on a highway, approximately a quarter of a mile from his sister-in-law's house. He walked the quarter of a mile distance to his sister-in-law's property through a frozen and muddy bean field, crossing a tree line in order to enter through the backyard of the property. When Ratliff reached the backyard at approximately 6:40 a.m., he sat inside of the blue truck parked in the backyard. Ratliff sat in the truck for approximately two hours, and made several phone calls. Ratliff called his sister-in-law's landline once and her cellphone number twice, but she did not answer.

Ratliff called the Victim's phone at 8:49 a.m. from inside the blue truck. The call lasted approximately four minutes. Ratliff asked if he and the Victim could get back together. The Victim declined and disconnected the call. Ratliff testified that he then walked into the garage and through the kitchen door on the back side of the house. The Victim asked how Ratliff got there and told him to leave. Ratliff slapped the Victim and began beating her while he straddled her on the floor. He eventually took his knife from its sheath on his side and stabbed the Victim four times in the chest. Three of the stab wounds to the Victim's chest were independently fatal wounds. The Victim also suffered abrasions on her forehead and contusions to her scalp.

At 9:04 a.m., Ratliff began placing phone calls. Ratliff called his daughters several times, but they did not answer. He left one of his daughters a voicemail stating that he had killed her mother. At 9:05 a.m., Ratliff called his brother, told him that he had killed the Victim, and his brother instructed him to call 911. At 9:30 a.m., Ratliff called 911.

When police officers arrived, they found Ratliff standing on the driveway. He told police that he killed the Victim by stabbing her in the heart. Officers located the Victim's body on the floor in the kitchen, as well as a pair of gloves and a bloody knife on the table. Ratliff was taken into custody. Later, police found Ratliff's binoculars on the ground outside of the blue truck.

On January 6, 2016, Detective Bonita Cannon ("Detective Cannon") and Detective Nick Sola interviewed Ratliff at the Clay County Detention Center. In the interview, which was recorded, Ratliff admitted to killing the Victim and detailed his actions in the weeks leading up to the murder. He told detectives that he stalked the Victim and he described how he beat and stabbed her. Ratliff reported that he had no remorse and that he had been planning to kill the Victim for weeks if she did not agree to reunify their marriage. Ratliff asked for the death penalty. During the interview, Ratliff appeared to be dressed in an anti-suicide smock and he reported that he was on suicide watch at the jail; however, he denied that he was suicidal or that he had mental health issues. He told detectives that he was previously committed, twice, in 2009 to a psychiatric hospital, but again denied that he was suffering from mental health issues at the time of the murder or interview.

Ratliff was charged in the Circuit Court of Clay County, Missouri with murder in the first degree and armed criminal action. At trial, Detective Cannon testified for the State. The prosecutor asked Detective Cannon questions about her interview with Ratliff before the video of the interview was played for the jury. At one point, the prosecutor asked, "In your training and experience in law enforcement, have you encountered individuals who suffer from mental illness or some sort of --." Defense counsel interrupted with an objection, and requested to approach the bench. The following conversation occurred:

[Defense Counsel]: To give an expert opinion on mental health, I do not believe the detective is able to give such an opinion. I don't believe the detectives with the Kansas City Police Department receive any special training with respect to mental health. I don't believe that she is a licensed psychiatrist or psychologist, and she can't make a diagnosis because she can't, based on the observation over the course of an hour and a half, determine whether Mr. Ratliff was suffering from any mental illness or defect.

[Prosecutor One]: Your Honor, I'm not offering it as an expert's opinion. I'm just asking based on her training and experience if he exhibited any signs of mental health illness or defect, not whether he actually suffered from any.

[Prosecutor Two]: She only made the observations[,] not diagnoses. And it's the kind of question that goes as to whether the confession was voluntary or not. You're asking the jury to make a decision on that.

[Defense Counsel]: This has nothing to do with the voluntariness of the confession. This has everything to do with the statement and attempting to make some kind of declaration by a witness that carries the authority of being a detective that my client was perfectly sane and mentally healthy. What -- signs of what mental illnesses was she observing for? Bipolar? Depression? Anxiety? She can tell all of that just by looking into his eyes during an interrogation? I think that's ridiculous.

[Prosecutor One]: Yeah, that's a routine question that I ask every single time I --

[Trial Court]: Well, I'll allow the one question. Nothing further. And then, [Defense Counsel], you may inquire on cross-examination. Several of the things that you have just stated, I think, would make excellent cross-examination questions.

[Defense Counsel]: Thank you, Judge.

[Trial Court]: All right.

[The proceedings returned to open court.]

[Trial Court]: The objection is overruled. You may proceed.

[Prosecutor One]: In your training and experience in law enforcement, have you encountered individuals who suffer from mental illness or defect?

[Detective Cannon]: Yes.

[Prosecutor One]: Did you observe Mr. Ratliff exhibit any signs that he was suffering from any mental disease?

[Detective Cannon]: No.

After a few more questions, the State played the video of the interview for the...