State v. Sexton
| Decision Date | 29 May 2012 |
| Docket Number | No. 7685,No. E2008-00292-SC-DDT-DD,7685,E2008-00292-SC-DDT-DD |
| Parties | STATE OF TENNESSEE v. HUBERT GLENN SEXTON |
| Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Automatic Appeal from the Court of Criminal Appeals
Criminal Court for Scott County
The defendant, tried and convicted of two counts of first degree murder, was sentenced to death for each offense. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed. In our review, we have found that the trial court erred by admitting detailed evidence of a prior claim of child sex abuse and by allowing references to the defendant's refusal to submit to a polygraph examination. Further, the record demonstrates several instances of prosecutorial misconduct during the opening statement and during the final arguments of both the guilt and penalty phases of the trial. Because, however, the defendant admitted to at least three witnesses that he committed the murders and the evidence of guilt was otherwise overwhelming, the errors had no effect on the verdicts rendered at the conclusion of the guilt phase of the trial. Each of the convictions is, therefore, affirmed. Nevertheless, because certain of the inadmissible evidence was particularly inflammatory and the prosecution made several inappropriate comments, the sentences of death must be set aside. The Court of Criminal Appeals is, in consequence, affirmed in part and reversed in part. The cause is remanded to the trial court for new sentencing hearings.
Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-206(a)(1); Judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals
Affirmed in Part and Reversed in Part
Larry M. Warner, Crossville, Tennessee, and Leif E. Jeffers, Assistant Public Defender, Huntsville, Tennessee (at trial); William P. Redick, Jr., Whites Creek, Tennessee, and Peter D. Heil, Nashville, Tennessee (amended motion for new trial); James A. Simmons, Hendersonville, Tennessee, and Richard L. Gaines, Knoxville, Tennessee (final amended motion for new trial and on appeal), for the appellant, Hubert Glenn Sexton.
Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter; William E. Young, Solicitor General; Gordon W. Smith, Associate Solicitor General; Mark E. Davidson and James E. Gaylord, Assistant Attorneys General; William Paul Phillips, District Attorney General; and John W. Galloway, Jr., Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, the State of Tennessee.
On the night of May 20, 2000, a Saturday, Stanley Goodman and his wife, Terry Sue Goodman, were shot to death as they slept in their bed at their residence in Scott County. Their bodies were discovered the next morning by Mr. Goodman's minor daughter, E.G., who resided in their home.1 The murders took place four days after another of Mr. Goodman's minor daughters, B.G., reported to authorities that she had been sexually abused by her stepfather, Hubert Glenn Sexton (the "Defendant"). At the time, the Defendant and his wife, Sherry Sexton, lived in Bradley County with the Defendant's daughter, B.S., and E.G.'s younger sister, B.G., and brother, Br.G., both of whom were Ms. Sexton's children by her marriage to Mr. Goodman.
Within days of the crimes, the Defendant was arrested and charged with two counts of first degree murder. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-202 (1997). On July 18, 2000, the district attorney general filed a notice seeking the death penalty for each of the murders. See Tenn. R. Crim. P. 12.3(b). The aggravating circumstance relied upon by the State for each of the two offenses was that "[t]he murder was committed for the purpose of avoiding, interfering with, or preventing a lawful arrest or prosecution of the defendant or another." Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-204(i)(6) (1997 & Supp. 1999); see also Tenn. R. Crim P. 12.3(b)(2).
Guilt Phase of the Trial
Hope Tharp, who served as the Child Protective Services Team Leader for the Department of Children's Services ("DCS") for Bradley County and several of its surrounding counties, first interviewed B.G. and Ms. Sexton in Bradley County on March 17, 2000, at the request of the Scott County DCS, as part of an investigation of possible child sexual abuse by the Defendant. The Defendant and Ms. Sexton had lived at the Goodman residence before moving to Bradley County. No charges resulted from the complaint.
Two months later, on May 16, 2000, Ms. Tharp received a report from authorities at Black Fox Elementary School in Cleveland that B.G., age 8, had made an allegation of sexual abuse by the Defendant. Based upon B.G.'s statement that the sexual abuse had occurred on the previous night, Ms. Tharp immediately notified Ms. Sexton and scheduled a meeting withthe Sextons at 4:00 p.m. that afternoon. When the Defendant and the Sextons' daughter B.S. failed to arrive at her office at the time of the meeting, Ms. Tharp sought the assistance of the Bradley County Sheriff's Department. After being notified that officers had found the Defendant at his residence, Ms. Tharp traveled there to meet with him and to explain the basis for DCS taking custody of the three children in the Sexton household. Three officers were present. The Defendant, after being warned that he could be arrested for custodial interference, provided information as to B.S.'s whereabouts. Ms. Tharp, who by that time had interviewed the three children living in the Sexton home, all of whose statements were identical, then explained to the Defendant that he would have to come to her office for questioning. Over objection by the Defendant, Ms. Tharp testified that she informed him that B.G. had claimed that she had been required to "close her eyes and open her mouth," to "put her mouth on his penis and suck it," and that "if she told she would never see her dad again." According to Ms. Tharp, the Defendant, upon hearing the accusation, stood from his chair, denied the truth of the allegations, and responded, "Well, she is getting this information from her sister, [E.G.], and her father." He insisted that B.G. had made up the story and that Mr. Goodman had "put her up to it." He also claimed that Mr. Goodman had telephoned him some three months earlier and played an audiotape recording of Mr. Goodman coaching B.G. to say "things." When Ms. Tharp advised the Defendant that his statement was inconsistent with that of B.G. and the other two children and that if he "did these things," he should confess and get treatment, he remarked, "Well, I can go over and sign papers saying I did it and serve two or three years in jail and we can be a family again." Ms. Tharp then explained,
Bradley County Sheriff's Deputy Jerry Kyle Millsaps, who went to the Sexton residence to assist DCS, overheard the Defendant complain to Ms. Sexton about "her family causing them problems" and say, "they think I'm guilty here already." He also overheard the Defendant proclaiming his innocence of child sex abuse and stating that he "was not going to jail for . . . a child abuse charge [and that i]f I go to jail for anything, it would be for murder." When questioned by the State at trial, Officer Millsaps also made reference to a possible polygraph examination for the Defendant, who initially consented to the test. On re-direct examination, and over objection by the Defendant, the State was permitted to ask, "Are you aware that when Mr. Sexton . . . was later given the opportunity to take the polygraph test, [he] wouldn't?" The officer responded in the negative.
On the same date DCS received the sex abuse complaint, Detective Tony Alvarez of the Bradley County Sheriff's Department became involved in the investigation. After driving to the school and speaking with B.G., Detective Alvarez provided the Defendant withMiranda2 warnings and then questioned him. The Defendant contended that Mr. Goodman was responsible for the charge made by B.G. and had persuaded "the children to trump up some false allegations." He claimed that Mr. Goodman was motivated by his displeasure with the Sextons' decision to move out of the Goodman home in Scott County to a residence in Bradley County, taking two of the three Goodman children with them.
Later in the week, Mr. Goodman, having been apprised of the investigation, contacted Detective Alvarez, informing him that he intended to file a petition in Bradley County on the following Monday seeking custody of the children. Afterward, the detective informed the Defendant of Mr. Goodman's plan. When, during this conversation, Detective Alvarez asked the Defendant about taking a polygraph examination regarding the sex abuse allegation, the Defendant declined, explaining that Special Agent Skip Elrod had informed him that polygraphs could be "fixed."
In the week before the murders, the Defendant informed Preston Adams, a co-worker, of the child abuse charge, told him that Mr. Goodman was responsible, and asked where he might acquire a .22 or .25 caliber handgun so that he could "try to take care of the matter before it could escalate." On Saturday, May 20, the Defendant worked in construction with Adams from 8:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. During that time, he told Adams he had not "had any sexual contact with the children." As the two men left the job site, the Defendant informed Adams that he "was not going to let [Mr. Goodman] come down [to Bradley County] before he took care of that."
At approximately 6:00 p.m., the Defendant drove to the Maxi Muffler shop where he visited with Clinton Daniel Mason, whom he had known for three or four years and saw as often as two or three times a week. While there, the Defendant asked Mason to return his .22 caliber rifle, which had been stored at Mason's residence, explaining that he had to "take care of some...
To continue reading
Request your trial