nancy robinson john edward robinson

In his motion to suppress and on appeal, Robinson argues K.S.A. This testimony was sufficient to authenticate the documents found in Robinson's possession or under his control. Carr, 300 Kan. at 164; State v. Harris, 284 Kan. 560, 57178, 162 P.3d 28 (2007). While it is improper for a prosecutor to argue that circumstances are not mitigating because they do not excuse the crime, State v. Scott, 286 Kan. 54, 118, 183 P.3d 801 (2008), the prosecutor did not make such an argument to the small group panel. On the first point, the dissent noted the obvious, i.e., that the finality of death makes it a qualitatively different punishment that requires a heightened need for reliability. Morrison's remarks explaining the purpose of the penalty phase reasonably conveyed to jurors that the process served as a mechanism to narrow the class of individuals eligible to receive a sentence of death by comparing aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Also, we presume prospective jurors followed the district judge's instruction, and we agree with Judge Anderson that the remarks were not of the type or character immune to such curative measures. 222505 has nothing to do with the territorial jurisdiction of officers, it likewise has nothing to do with the territorial jurisdiction of district judges. The district judge arrived at different rulings between Stapleton and Brown, not because he applied the rules in an arbitrary or disparate fashion, but because the facts supported different rulings under K.S.A. 146 Wash.2d at 62. 3. When reviewing the denial of a motion for mistrial founded on claims of juror misconduct, we consider whether the trial court abused its discretion in determining: (1) whether juror misconduct occurred and (2) if so, whether the misconduct substantially prejudiced [defendant's] right to a fair trial. State v. Armstrong, 299 Kan. 405, 442, 324 P.3d 1052 (2014). Robinson next argues law enforcement officers exercised police powers beyond their territorial jurisdiction, in violation of K.S.A. Instead, the question was designed to challenge the credibility of Nancy Robinson and her testimony that her husband was a good family man. c. Comments about the Severity of Robinson's Capital Murders. But doing so would only increase the already too high incidence of unreliable and arbitrary death penalties and risk causing procedural harms that also undermine the death penalty's constitutionality. 135 S.Ct. Moreover, none of the six veniremembers on the second small group panel served as a member of defendant's jury, and the district judge properly defined mitigating circumstances in his ultimate instructions. To make that determination, the appellate court must consider whether the subject instruction was legally and factually appropriate, employing an unlimited review of the entire record. State v. Herbel, 296 Kan. 1101, 1121, 299 P.3d 292 (2013) (quoting State v. Williams, 295 Kan. 506, Syl. In January 1985, Robinson told Gaddis another organization, Hope House, had referred a young lady to his program, and he had placed her at a motel in Kansas. On September 1, a $500 check payable to Specialty Publications was drawn on Lewicka's account, leaving an available balance of $1. I thought it interesting that Mr. Cunningham didn't take two minutes to decide whether or not his bait of choice, the computer, will even be available for him in prison. She selected Harvey County, which had a population of 35,737, as one of the control groups because its county seat, Newton, was a bedroom community to Wichita, much like Olathe was a bedroom community to Kansas City. However, when defense counsel initially described the football analogy, Juror 39 inquired, Are you asking if I would be open-minded? Defense counsel said, No. Defense counsel never asked if Juror 39 could set aside information obtained from the media, presume Robinson innocent, and decide the case on the evidence. However, Stettler wanted to review the supporting data and requested the same. Through these 1970 amendments, the legislature eliminated the authority of courts of limited jurisdiction to issue extraterritorial search warrants; it imposed no similar limitation on district judges; and it retained in K.S.A. Robinson also points to the arrest warrant and subpoena statutes, which expressly grant district judges authority to issue extraterritorial warrants and orders, as support for his construction. In 1984, he investigated a consumer complaint filed by the owners of Back Care Systems, International (Back Care), alleging Robinson defrauded Back Care through a bogus invoicing scheme through his company, Equi-plus. You answer that question.. 272 Kan. 894, Syl. The final series of e-mails Lewicka's father received from his daughter's account said she was traveling to overseas locations. Lewis declared that, based on her preliminary review, there was reason to believe Robinson suffered from a bipolar mood disorder; he was severely physically and emotionally abused throughout childhood; as a result of this maltreatment, he experiences episodic dissociative states; as many as four generations of family members may have suffered similar mental illness; a 1991 MRI revealed brain abnormalities, allegedly a result of transient ischemic attacks; and Robinson cannot appreciate the nature and strength of the evidence against him. See Anthony, 257 Kan. at 101920 (trial court did not abuse discretion or otherwise interfere with counsel of choice where it did not attempt to restrain counsel from entering the case and only declined the request to continue trial to allow new counsel time to prepare). Nevertheless, the circumstances surrounding his use of and comments regarding the Bible, including the fact that they were isolated, brief, and made after the jurors' vote had revealed they were in unanimous agreement as to sentence, combined with the district judge's curative instruction, mitigated any prejudice. State v. Noah, 246 Kan. 291, 293, 788 P.2d 257 (1990) (K.S.A. The defense argued the testing was necessary for its expert, Dr. Dorothy O. Lewis, a professor of psychiatry at New York University School of Medicine, to conduct a psychiatric evaluation of Robinson. 222503 and 222505. See Kleypas, 272 Kan. at 108485 (citing Chapman, 386 U.S. at 24); see also Novotny, 297 Kan. at 1190 (comment on demeanor was harmless beyond reasonable doubt, given lack of gross or flagrant remarks and solid evidence presented by the State). Considering the record and argument in its totality, the prosecutor was addressing law enforcement's inability to find Stasi's bodynot Robinson's failure to take the stand or to otherwise inform law enforcement of the body's locationas the ultimate concealment. Jurors would not have necessarily and naturally understood Morrison's remark as a comment on Robinson's postarrest silence, and, therefore, it was not improper. He allowed the defense to inform prospective jurors of sensitive case-specific allegations during small group voir dire; explore potential juror bias related to such facts; examine whether case-specific facts prevented jurors from realistically considering a life sentence, particularly when questionnaire responses indicated potential case-specific bias; and discuss potential bias in response to case-specific evidence during general voir dire. [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: You'd try to keep an open mind? There the capital defendant argued the trial court erred in denying his request for a separate sentencing jury, resulting in prejudice because the same jury that heard his guilt phase also heard the penalty phase argument. 272 Kan. at 994. While judicial bias and recusal precedent may inform the Fourth Amendment analysis, the appearance of bias standard is inconsistent with the objective test employed by the Supreme Court. Mach is distinguishable. The First Circuit concluded that [w]e cannot assume, as the district court apparently did, that individual voir dire of the jurors and a curative instruction would not have eradicated the risk of prejudice in this case. 519 F.3d at 88; see Cross v. Unlike his earlier e-mails, Tom signed this e-mail as MASTERthe same way this name/title appeared in Robinson's other e-mail communications, including Robinson's February 25 e-mail to Trouten and Jim Turner's April 27 e-mail to Remington. In stark contrast, Morrison made the comment at issue here in the context of rehabilitating the State's evidence. Robinson argues the prosecutor improperly utilized imaginary scripts: (1) during closing argument when the prosecutor advanced the rhetorical question, And one must wonder, did that poor, fat, disabled Debbie Faith, did she watch her mom get killed?; (2) during closing argument when the prosecutor said, We know that there he is grinning like a Cheshire cat; within hours of Lisa Stasi having that baby ripped from her arms.; and (3) during closing argument when the prosecutor made argument based on a letter Robinson purportedly sent to victim Lisa Stasi's brother, which was not admitted into evidence. In fact, in analyzing Robinson's venue challenge, we held that the published reports did not warrant a finding of presumed prejudice throughout the venire. The district judge's reliance on this language was misplaced. However, as discussed above, 1 week after the legislature approved the bill resulting in the enactment of K.S.A. State v. Burnett, 300 Kan. 419, 436, 329 P.3d 1169 (2014). Now, it's coming in in the penalty phase of the trial. I didn't want to hurt her. During closing argument, prosecutor Morrison challenged Robinson's mitigation evidence by highlighting his use of fraud and deception to facilitate crime both inside and outside the prison environment. He says, gosh, you know, you got you need to, let me live because I'm going to be peaceful in prison, although I haven't demonstrated that.. See Powell v. Commonwealth, 267 Va. 107, 144, 590 S.E.2d 537 (2004) (trial court did not err in refusing to allow defendant to voir dire jurors on subject of his prior conviction; jurors exposed to this information were not subject to automatic exclusion where defense counsel disclosed prior conviction; challenge barred by invited error doctrine). This list included the mailing addresses and, for some, birthday information for Trouten's family members. Contrary to Robinson's argument that jurors are not given a way to express a decision for a life sentence, Marsh suggests they are told exactly how to do that. During the rebuttal portion of closing, the State argued that Robinson's common scheme or course of conduct was characterized by four circumstances or elements, including similar methods of killing the victims and subsequent concealment of the bodies. Robinson also cites Ruberto v. Duke v. State, 889 So.2d 1, 31 (Ala.Crim.App.2002) (terms one scheme and course of conduct could be understood by the average juror in their common usage), cert. Other circumstantial evidence corroborated Remington's testimony and the authenticity of these e-mails. As set forth in the previous section, we review Judge Anderson's factual findings for substantial competent evidence and his legal conclusions de novo. Juror 14's statement that he would give a slight edge to law enforcement testimony over lay witness testimony, without any further information to weigh, fails to persuade us of his bias in this case. But capital murder can occur in one act or transaction, which presumably happened when defendant killed both Sheila and Debbie Faith, thus completing all of the elements of the later-to-be-established crime of capital murder. Other pertinent facts, such as the date and author of the writing, the form or medium in which it was written, the availability of the original, etc., are also absent. That paradigm comports with the long-standing rule that courts are to impose the punishment that was in effect when the crime was committed and precludes the punishment-increasing gamesmanship displayed here. at 239. For the first half of 1994, these checks were often deposited into an account held at Colorado National Bank. K.S.A. 1639, 6 L.Ed.2d 751 (1961), the media unleashed a barrage of newspaper headlines, articles, cartoons, and pictures against defendant leading up to trial. The court may simply purge the panel by discharging those individuals not qualified.). Defense counsel explained that earlier that morning, he entered Judge Anderson's chambers and noticed a copy of that morning's Olathe Daily News sitting in the reception area. denied 131 S.Ct. Young opined that any number of these blows could have resulted in death. Robinson argues the Anthony factors should apply to his challenge. 222503 as part of the codification of the Kansas Criminal Code. Robinson's challenge is founded on the Sixth Amendment right to counsela fundamental right guaranteed to all criminal defendants. at 18. Did Judge Anderson err in allowing the medical examiner's testimony regarding defensive wounds? 216619(b) compel our review of the challenge under K.S.A. Based on his extensive jury selection procedures and the voir dire testimony of seated jurors, Judge Anderson had a reasonable basis for concluding that the jurors selected could be impartial. 214624(b) provides a method for the defendant in every capital-murder case to remove biased jurors during the penalty phase. This is not surprising because the Kansas act largely mirrors the federal provisions, and therefore wiretap applications are subject to both the state and federal requirements. Attached to the disability form was a medical report confirming Debbie's ongoing physical impairment. See State v. Daniel, 291 Kan. 490, 498, 242 P.3d 1186 (2010) (Section 15 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights provides the same protection from unlawful government searches and seizures as the Fourth Amendment to the federal Constitution.), cert. Robinson argues that the prosecutor's use of the term we're, instead of you're, in questioning Cunningham improperly suggested that both the State and Cunningham personally thought it possible that Robinson could have Internet access in prison. Were the prosecutor's remarks about panelists' preconceived opinions improper? In an effort to define common scheme or course of conduct, Robinson examines characteristics or factors present in other cases found to satisfy the requirements of K.S.A. According to Helen Robinsons testimony, as described by CNN, the couple couldnt have children and felt it would take a long time to adopt through an agency or charity. 6. 213421. On April 14, 1976, the legislature approved House Bill 2729, resulting in the enactment of K.S.A. John Robinson's case as a serial killer broke wide open when he was arrested in 2000 for allegedly sexually assaulting one woman and allegedly stealing sex toys from another woman. Young believed the state of decomposition was consistent with the death having occurred 5 to 6 years prior but admitted no precise date of death could be determined. But there the jury was not given any instruction on how to determine mitigating circumstances. We held that K.S.A. He told one employee he was in a rush to get to the airport. Another defense expert found that there was reason to believe Robinson suffered from a bipolar mood disorder; he was severely physically and emotionally abused throughout childhood; as a result of this maltreatment, he experiences episodic dissociative states; as many as four generations of family members may have suffered similar mental illness; a 1991 MRI revealed brain abnormalities, allegedly a result of transient ischemic attacks; and Robinson cannot appreciate the nature and strength of the evidence against him, court records say. Lane took swabs from a representative sampling of the spots and submitted them to the Kansas City, Missouri, Regional Crime Lab (KCMO Lab) for further analysis, where Detective Frank Booth, a DNA analysist, confirmed the genetic profile from the samples matched Lewicka's DNA. Robinson argues Juror 39 should have been excused because she never said she could entirely ignore her previous knowledge of the case or presume defendant innocent. Locklear appears to be of questionable authority even in Washington, and we find it unpersuasive here. See State v. LaGrange, 294 Kan. 623, Syl. Hensley is distinguishable. Robinson's trash was exposed to fellow residents of the 500unit mobile home community. 222502(a). Robinson offers no further examples of media interference during court proceedings, and none are apparent from the record. Also, the isolated statement, made weeks before the jury was instructed on the capital sentencing process, was not gross and flagrant or the product of ill will. During the rebuttal portion of penalty phase closing argument, the prosecutor challenged Robinson's mitigation case and emphasized the significance of the multiple murder aggravating circumstance. Finally, although there are other aspects of the majority opinion with which I take exception, I see no reason for further argument here. 223216(1) with Tex.Crim. K.S.A. Judge Anderson declined, finding the terms were not particularly difficult for a lay person to resolve. Did scope of voir dire rulings violate constitutional rights? He also noted his personal views would be subject to and limited by further instructions from the court. 214624(e) and said: Kansas jurors, presumed to follow their instructions, are made aware that: a determination that mitigators outweigh aggravators is a decision that a life sentence is appropriate; a determination that aggravators outweigh mitigators or a determination that mitigators do not outweigh aggravatorsincluding a finding that aggravators and mitigators are in balanceis a decision that death is the appropriate sentence; and an inability to reach a unanimous decision will result in a sentence of life imprisonment. 548 U.S. at 17980. b. 222503 was a response to its earlier approval of K.S.A. 222401a. Additional circumstances corroborated Remington's testimony and the authenticity of these exhibits. The officers also seized a clear plastic folder containing 42 envelopes preaddressed to members of Trouten's family, along with 31 pieces of pastel-colored stationary with Love you, Suzette signed at the bottom. Glines was a former employee of Nancy Robinson, who maintained a long-distance relationship with Robinson by telephone and e-mail after she moved to California in 1997. This process is all about finding just punishment, fairness, and I'm sure we would all agree that capital punishment should be reserved for the most severe crimes. 1594 (2012). The argument is wholly unpersuasive in light of the appellant's venue study, venue challenge on appeal, and the arguments the defense advanced at trial in opposition to sequestration, including its support for the juror numbering system in lieu of sequestration. Although defense counsel took it upon themselves to divide the labor, Judge Anderson was unaware of this decision. The judge's former prosecution of Robinson and the current capital murder investigation most certainly did not arise from a common investigation or single transaction or event. A vague law impermissibly delegates basic policy matters to policemen, judges, and juries for resolution on an ad hoc and subjective basis, with the attendant dangers of arbitrary and discriminatory application. 276 Kan. at 822 (quoting Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 10809, 92 S.Ct. The jury was free to consider this evidence offered in support of the capital murder counts, Counts II and III, as probative of Robinson's specific intent to inflict bodily injury under Count I, aggravated kidnapping. Around the time Stasi began dating Carl, Robinson was looking for a private adoption opportunity for his younger brother, Donald Robinson, and Donald's wife, Helen, who lived in the Chicago area. The juror did not read from the Bible or quote any particular verse. During direct examination, Carolyn Trouten testified to these facts, and she was subject to cross-examination from Robinson. K48573). A close examination of Mattingly's preliminary hearing testimony and the State's proffer undercuts Robinson's claim that prosecutor Welch intentionally misrepresented Mattingly's testimony in her proffer to the court. See Fredricks v. Foltz, 221 Kan. 28, 30, 557 P.2d 1252 (1976) (finding federal interpretations persuasive where state and federal rules similar). denied 521 U.S. 1118 (1997). Moreover, the mere presence of the Bible in the jury room, standing alone, is not deemed to have affected any juror's sentencing decision. It is unlikely this particular ruling was fresh in the prosecutor's mind during the rebuttal portion of closing argument. According to the Supreme Court decision, Robinson was a self-employed, but not entirely successful, entrepreneur. Robinson advances five arguments in support of his actual prejudice challenge, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion by: (1) failing to acknowledge uncontroverted social science evidence that individuals cannot set aside preconceived opinions; (2) applying K.S.A. Judge Anderson allowed defense counsel to voir dire the expert. The lengthy delays create two special constitutional difficulties. 135 S.Ct. Were questions about Social Security benefit checks improper? Judge Anderson denied defendant's motion to strike the panel, believing any confusion could be cured. However, a review of their voir dire testimony confirms their impartiality. 223214. In 1964, at the age of 21, John Robinson married Nancy Jo Lynch. denied 541 U.S. 1090 (2004). [S]tudies indicate that the factors that most clearly ought to affect application of the death penaltynamely, comparative egregiousness of the crimeoften do not, while circumstances that ought not to affect application of the death penalty, such as race, gender, or geography, often do. 135 S.Ct. Judge Anderson explained that Juror 147 had been deferred on the first day due to Yom Kippur, but that he appeared on the second day and was assigned to the current panel for small group voir dire. Manipulation and deceit, they go hand in hand with the defendant throughout these last 20 years.. 247 Kan. at 195 ([i]t is not necessary to establish that the need existed only that the request for assistance was made). We settled this issue in State v. Scott, 286 Kan. 54, 6568, 183 P.3d 801 (2008), holding that two convictions arising out of a double homicide, one for capital murder based on the intentional and premeditated killing of more than one person and the other for premeditated first-degree murder, were improperly multiplicitous because, under K.S.A. Juror 184 maintained no contact with the department after resigning from his volunteer position. Robinson also moved for a mistrial based on the improper inference that Robinson had dead bodies in barrels in unit F10. 1, 343 P.3d 1165 (2015). Robinson served a 40month term of imprisonment with Kansas Department of Corrections (KDOC) from 1987 to 1991. Were Robinson's capital murder convictions multiplicitous? In particular, he argues the capital murder elements instructions were deficient in failing to define common scheme or course of conduct. Similarly, he contends the lack of such a definition rendered those terms unconstitutionally vague. Robinson believes the use of the term cannot proves the district judge employed an impossibility standard to defendant's venue change motion. Robinson identifies only two instances relevant to this claim where the trial court enforced its ruling and limited the scope of inquiry. Even so, the majority held that Judge Paul Clark did not abuse his discretion under K.S.A. 10 is that the State's burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt applies to both object clauses of the sentencethat aggravators exist and that aggravators outweigh mitigating circumstances. Thompson examined the plastic sheeting and duct tape and developed four latent prints of value. Juror 324 expressed a personal belief that Robinson was likely to be guilty based on the pretrial coverage of the case. This plain meaning is consistent with the history and context that gave rise to the legislature's enactment of K.S.A. According to the court records, Robinsons youngest daughter, Christy, had a daughter and younger son. Instead, the State's witnesses merely testified to the fact of their seizure and subsequent testing for trace evidence. 1190, 108 L.Ed.2d 316 (1990). K.S.A. Considering the totality of the circumstances, we hold that the comment was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Trial Court's Use of an Anonymous Jury Selection Procedure. Based on the totality of Juror 202's responses, Judge Anderson's ruling is fairly supported by the record. During cross-examination, the prosecutor asked Nancy Robinson if she was there when defendant cashed those two checks. Were questions related to Cunningham's written report improper? Obermeier tried the Back Care case in January 1986. Robinson's claim is both legally and factually suspect. There were also several letters with generic greetings such as Hi, dad or Hi, mom handwritten at the top of stationary, along with a number of blank envelopes, stationary, and greeting cards. denied 534 U.S. 1066 (2001). 96, sec. The bedding also matched the pattern depicted in nude photographs of Lewicka found in Robinson's Olathe storage unit. On October 7, 2002, just before opening statements, defendant renewed his motion to change venue for a second time. Did scope of voir dire rulings conceal mitigation impairment? He didn't cry when there was testimony about Izabela Lewicka's body was taken out of that barrel. Instead, the prosecutor asked the question in a fact-neutral manner, Were you asked by defense counsel not to write a report? This allowed Cunningham to respond, No maam, dispelling any notion that defense counsel had instructed the expert not to prepare a written report. 60455 is not triggered by juror speculation, but by evidence of prior crimes committed by a defendant. State v. Conley, No. Nine of the 259 panelists (3.4 percent) were excused because of previously undisclosed hardships or grounds unrelated to pretrial publicity or the death penalty. denied 519 U.S. 845 (1996); Plantz v. State, 1994 OK CR 33, 876 P.2d 268, 279 (Okla.Crim.App.1994) (trial court properly limited the defense's voir dire on what jurors would consider as mitigation); State v. Hill, 331 S.C. 94, 10304, 501 S.E.2d 122 (1998) (Morgan does not require voir dire on specific mitigating circumstances). In 1964 he moved to Kansas City and married Nancy Jo Lynch, who bore their first child, John Jr., in 1965, and . Since Irvin, the Supreme Court has twice considered and rejected claims that juror declarations of impartiality should be set aside. First, several items were immediately identifiable as Trouten's, including her Social Security card, Michigan driver's license, birth certificate, high school diploma, Sam's Club membership card, American Red Cross certification card, passport application, and prescription medication. Robinson suggests the jurors' declarations of impartiality were unreliable in light of the extensive and unfavorable media attention. 222505 gave law enforcement officers power to execute warrants outside their jurisdiction, creating an exception to a law enforcement officer's territorial limitation under K.S.A. Once the reports were organized, Stettler met with members of the JOCO Lab and found 46 reports that had not been included in the State's disclosures. Robinson later said the birth mother had decided not to place the child for adoption. The trial court's discretion is not without constitutional limit. However, Judge Anderson cautioned defense counsel not to phrase such questions in a manner intended to elicit a commitment or promise from prospective jurors. denied 225 Kan. 845 (1978). Grissom was a territorial jurisdiction case, not a venue case. Unlike previous e-mails, the tone of this message was respectful and polite. A few months later, Larry Heath received a typewritten letter purportedly from Bonner, which was unusual because Bonner had always written letters by hand. In 1970, the legislature repealed K.S.A. On appeal, the trial court's decision denying a motion for mistrial is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. State v. Williams, 299 Kan. 509, 559, 324 P.3d 1078 (2014). As for search warrants, applicants stated that they would not provide sufficient evidence to accomplish the goals of this investigation. Applicants defined those goals to include: a. ohio county obituaries,
Why Is There A Shortage Of Paper Towels Again?, Kevin Mccarthy Staff Directory, Why Are There No Reruns Of China Beach, Articles N