Thompson v. State, 66224
| Decision Date | 18 September 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 66224,66224 |
| Citation | 494 So.2d 203,11 Fla. L. Weekly 485 |
| Parties | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 485 Patrick James THOMPSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Max Rudmann of Martin Zevin, P.A., Boca Raton, and Robert P. Kundinger, Pompano Beach, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Robert S. Jaegers, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Patrick James Thompson appeals his conviction for first-degree murder and his sentence of death after a jury recommendation of life imprisonment. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. We reverse his conviction and death sentence and remand for a new trial because of improperly admitted evidence concerning a collateral crime committed by Thompson.
The record reflects that on the morning of January 21, 1983, the body of a 29-year-old woman was discovered inside a Panasonic stereo box in a dumpster behind the Stadium Pub in Fort Lauderdale. The victim had been strangled to death, and her body was extensively bruised. Lacerations on her hands indicated that she had resisted her attacker. She was clothed and wearing jewelry; however, her jeans were partially unzipped. A vaginal swab revealed the presence of sperm, but the victim's vagina showed no signs of trauma.
The victim's boyfriend testified that he initially met her in a lounge approximately one month before the murder, that he and the victim had sex on the night of January 19, and that he last saw the victim at approximately 6:00 p.m. on January 20. At that time the victim informed him that she was going to her uncle's house to pick up some personal items and would return later that evening. She left in his Cadillac which was found the next day stuck in the sand near the St. Helen's Church parking lot. The boyfriend also testified that the victim had been expecting to see her former boyfriend, and that she was planning to tell her former boyfriend that she no longer wanted to see him. No evidence was introduced to show that Thompson was the former boyfriend or had ever known the victim.
Thompson was arrested for the victim's murder approximately one year after the body was discovered. The arresting detective testified that the warrant was issued when he found that the appellant's fingerprint matched a print taken from the Panasonic box containing the victim's body and that appellant lived two blocks from St. Helen's Church. At the time of his arrest, Thompson told the detective that he had no knowledge of the murder, that he had thrown two Panasonic speaker boxes into the dumpster at his apartment complex in late December or early January, and that he had not been to the Stadium Pub.
Conflicting testimony was introduced concerning Thompson's presence at the scene. One witness testified that he helped a man struggling to put a box into the dumpster, but that Thompson was positively not that man. Another witness claimed to have seen Thompson and the victim standing near the Cadillac stuck in the sand.
Over appellant's objection, the state introduced evidence of a collateral crime committed by appellant two years prior to this offense. The victim of the collateral crime testified that Thompson had abducted her at approximately 11:00 p.m., by accosting her, threatening to shoot her, and driving with her to the St. Helen's Church parking lot. Because she feared Thompson would kill her, she complied when he asked her to remove her clothes, perform oral sex on him, and have sexual intercourse. According to the victim, Thompson told her that his name was Richie, that he had raped her because a girl had jilted him, and that he was sorry he had raped her. He took her back to her car and kissed her good night. The victim testified that she never saw a gun, and that appellant did not use physical force on her. She considered not reporting the incident, but, after discussing it with her roommate, the victim called the police. Thompson was subsequently arrested and convicted of sexual battery and kidnapping.
As part of the collateral crime evidence, the state also introduced testimony indicating that appellant was having marital problems during the period in which the woman was raped, and that, in January, 1983, he was having problems with his girlfriend.
After considering this collateral crime testimony along with the other evidence, the jury found Thompson guilty of first-degree murder and recommended a life sentence. The trial judge, however, imposed the death penalty.
On appeal, Thompson raises three issues concerning his conviction and sentence. We find dispositive his contention that the admission in evidence of his earlier criminal offense denied his constitutional right to a fair trial because it was not sufficiently similar in accordance with the standards set forth by this Court in ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kight v. State
...there is more than a "mere general similarity" between the facts of the McGoogin robbery and the Butler murder. Compare Thompson v. State, 494 So.2d 203 (Fla.1986); Peek v. State, 488 So.2d 52 (Fla.1986); Drake v. State, 400 So.2d 1217 (Fla.1981). The details of the two offenses are strikin......
-
Beasley v. State, 85-1859
...sister to testify because the location, times, acts, and method employed on both girls were substantially the same. See Thompson v. State, 494 So.2d 203 (Fla.1986); Heuring v. State, 495 So.2d 893 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). The similar fact evidence was relevant to show appellant had the opportun......
-
Gray v. State
...similar fact evidence does not meet the strikingly similar requirement found in Feller v. State, 637 So.2d 911 (Fla.1994), Thompson v. State, 494 So.2d 203 (Fla.1986), and Drake v. State, 400 So.2d 1217 (Fla.1981), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 978, 104 S.Ct. 2361, 80 L.Ed.2d 832 (1984), and goes ......
-
Padgett v. State, 88-1786
...refused to recede from the Williams proscription against propensity evidence in sexual abuse cases. See, e.g., Heuring; Thompson v. State, 494 So.2d 203 (Fla.1986); Peek v. State, 488 So.2d 52 (Fla.1986). 4 If a victim's testimony in regard to prior sexual assaults is not admissible for pur......