WPC  ^;HD&ΊONDbv-HRo`g2I5y7TJ;du[* \=_ Ƨ?grB#HZ@vah,`cDd4|Hd@,:< -!7)KM69W< l2^/ݮ}WH}s^3'J/+c~DlG7J$ӹr zU>ھuK]wOC9 7bG&Xd7ukz#jdġRG,{`a$2#2ɥQTqI懕78B#1q؄7\k? F$MG9lTit8"Y=t<}% IY,j-+XזTcb¹SY/WW C(Bp?B@b ;]oc*ZD훞.Y# F %Q W 0(X U: w@ 4   0l% 0D  UN U:9 s U.[bU:U: BU: 0D D3bbb 0D AQ** 0D D/4 BcHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLh X ""  XXX X XX   Ad FILEDXX   July6,1999CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerkdAh ($,rAZ"Arial Regular \V\\D\]P]T]D]P]P]Ӏy&t t3|x]((3$ !      0  (#$  0    (9 Z 6Times New Roman Regular,cAZ"Arial Regular XXX X XX   Ad FILEDXX   January15,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAM %2A`ArialTT ,cAZ"Arial RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5,~AZ"Arial Regular d,cAZ"Arial Regular(3$ !  'dxd(3$ !  "-C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd !  TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T]r*<,(j 8` `@E` 8ttxP,  r]  $X X $@*APPENDIX XXԈ   @R R (ExcerptsfromtheCourtofCriminalAppealsDecision)  T 7)6XdXXd7X  XXXXr*<,(j 8` `@E ` 8ttxPX  rߛ@k k D INTHETENNESSEECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALS  @rr)DATNASHVILLE@&DAUGUST1997SESSION'XXDpXX'STATEOFTENNESSEE, h    D ) p C.C.A.NO.01C019606CR00230 $ t  `     h    D )   `  ` Appellee,   h    D ) p DAVIDSONCOUNTY  L   `     h    D )  p (No.87F1682Below)   8  VS. `     h    D ) $   `     h    D ) p TheHonorableAnnLacyJohns   DONALDRAYMIDDLEBROOKS, D ) p     `     h    D ) p (RESENTENCINGDEATHPENALTY)     ` Appellant.   h    D ) p    FORAPPELLANT:   h    D  p FORAPPELLEE: X LionelR.Barrett,Jr. h    D  p JohnKnoxWalkup $ WashingtonSquareTwo,Suite418 D  p AttorneyGeneral&Reporter   222SecondAvenueNorthNashville,TN37201 h    D  p MichaelE.Moore   `     h    D  p SolicitorGeneralRichardMcGee601WoodlandStreet h    D  p KathyMorante 8 Nashville,TN37206 h    D  p DeputyAttorneyGeneral n  `     h    D  p 425FifthAvenueNorth `     h    D  p CordellHullBuilding,SecondFloor `     h    D  p Nashville,TN372430493 `     h    D  p VictorS.JohnsonIII `     h    D  p DistrictAttorneyGeneral `     h    D  p RogerD.Moore `     h    D  p AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral `     h    D  p JohnC.Zimmerman `     h    D  p AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral `     h    D  p WashingtonSquare,Suite500 `     h    D  p 222SecondAvenueNorth `     h    D  p Nashville,TN372011649OPINIONFILED:January15,1998 00+0  SENTENCEOFDEATHAFFIRMED  22.3  CURWOODWITT  617 Judge  l728  OYќ @D[SectionI.BackgroundDeleted]  @D[SectionII\\\.\Constitutionalityof Heinous,Atrocious,andCruelAggravating@@$D\@$D\CircumstanceDeleted]  b М̛ @/ / DIII.INTRODUCTIONOFEVIDENCEOFVICTIMSRACE  J @5 5 DASAMOTIVEFORTHECOMMISSIONOFTHECRIME  `  Theappellantcontendsthatthestatewasimproperlyallowedtointroduceirrelevantandinflammatoryevidencetendingtoexploititsbeliefthatthemurderofthevictimwasbasedupontheappellantsracistbeliefs.Specifically,theappellantobjectstothetestimonyofShannonStewart,whotestifiedthathehadconversationswiththeappellantonthemorningofthecrimeinwhichtheappellantexpressedracialanimosity.Theappellantcontendsthattheprosecutorsclosingargumentalsoimproperlycalledonthejurytoimposethedeathpenaltybecauseoftheappellantsracistbeliefs.Wefindthisissuetobewithoutmerit. `  Priortothesentencinghearing,theappellantfiledamotioninlimineseeking  exclusionofthisevidenceofracialbelief.Atthehearingonthemotion,theappellantarguedthatwhilethistestimonywasrelevantatthefirsttrialtoshowpremeditation,thestatewasnotrequiredtoprovetheelementsoffirstdegreemurderattheresentencinghearing,andtheprejudicialimpactofthistestimonywouldbeextreme.ThetrialcourttookthematterunderadvisementuntilStewartwascalledasawitness,atwhichtimeitmadethefollowingruling:8 ` WhatIneededtodoanddiddoisreadthetranscriptsoIcouldunderstandexactlywhatthequestionsandanswerswere,anditappearstomethatitisrelevant,andIhaveconductedtherequisitebalancingtestandfindittobeadmissible,iftheStatechoosestointroduceit. ` (#` (# 8 ` Inresponsetoyourargumentthatthestatedbasisofadmissibilitypreviouslywastoprovepremeditation.Youhavetoputthatinthecontext.Thatwasinacasewherebothphaseswerebeingtried,andtheproofwasbeingintroducedintheguiltorinnocencephase,sotheStatewouldnothavebeenaddressingthatatsentencing.Forpurposesofthishearing,wherethisjuryisjusthearingallthisforthefirsttime,theevaluationhastobemadeindependentofthattotally,which,youknow,forthereasonIjuststated,didnotaddressbefore,butitisrelevantandadmissibleforsentencing.ThatistheevaluationIhaveconducted,notbasedonwhatwasdonethelasttime,becauseitisapplesandoranges. ` (#` (#  95;  `  Stewartthentestifiedbeforethejuryabouthisconversationswiththeappellantpriortothenightofthemurder:\\8 ` [Theappellant]wastellingmestuff,youknow,thatIreallydidnt,youknow,caretolistentoatthatage,youknow,tellingmelikehewasKKKandhesaidaniggerwalkeduptohimandsaid,Hi,andhehithiminhismouthandhehadalittleringon,atigerhead,andheshowedmesomebloodinthecreasesofhisring,andstuff. ` (#` (# \\ `  Basedonthisproof,thestatemadethefollowingargumentduringthefinalclosingargument:8 ` ThetestimonyinthiscasetellsyoumoreaboutDonaldMiddlebrooksfromthedaysithappened,fromShannonStewart,thanallthepsychologiststhatyoucanbringinthiscourtroom,from1989tothepresent.ShannonStewarttoldyoumoreaboutthismanthananyPh[.]D.couldeverdo. ` (#` (#  ` ****8 ` Andwhenwefoundoutfromhispsychologistthatthepsychologisthadconvenientlyneglectedtodictateonthetranscriptionwordssuchaswe[sic]usedracialepithets.Thecomplexityofthismurderdealtwithrace. ` (#` (#  ` ****8 ` Youdecidethiscaseonevidence.Wevesaidthat,andtherearesomeprettyuglythingsinthiscasethatareembarrassingandfrighteningtomanyofyouonthejury.Whathappenedinthiscaseiseverymothersworstnightmare,butevenso,inthiscase,because,nodoubt,KerrickMajorshadbeentoldthattherewereasmallgroupofpeopleinthisworldwhowillneverlikeyou,nomatterwhatyoudo,whatyoubecome,orhowyoutreatthem.Theywillonlyseeyourskin. ` (#` (# \\ `  Wenotethatondirectappeal,thesupremecourtheldthatStewartstestimonywasadmissible:\\8 ` Thetestimonyisclearlyrelevanttoshowpremeditationandamotiveforthevictimsbrutalslaying.ThetestimonyisalsorelevanttocontradictthedefendantsstatementthatRogerBrewingtonwastheleaderinthecommissionoftheoffense.Inaddition,giventherelevancyofthestatements,wefindthattheprejudicialeffectdidnotsubstantiallyoutweightheirprobativevalue.Statev.Banks,564S.W.2d947,951(Tenn.1978). 8,', Accordingly,weholdthatthetrialcourtcorrectlyadmittedShannonStewartstestimonyaboutthesestatements. ` (#` (# ̜Middlebrooks,840S.W.2dat330. / +0  `  TennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection392203hasbeeninterpretedasonlypermittingintroductionofevidencerelevanttopunishmentatthesentencingphase.Evidenceisrelevanttopunishmentonlyifitisrelevanttoastatutoryaggravatingcircumstanceortoamitigatingcircumstanceraisedbythedefendant.Cozzolinov.State, 84: 584S.W.2d765,76768(Tenn.1979);seealsoStatev.Adkins,653S.W.2d708,71516  (Tenn.1983). `  Regardless,ataresentencinghearing,boththestateandthedefendant areentitledtoofferevidencerelatingtothecircumstancesofthecrimesothatthesentencingjurywillhaveessentialbackgroundinformationtoensurethatthejuryactsfromabaseofknowledgeinsentencingthedefendant.Statev.Adkins,725S.W.2d660,663(Tenn. x  1987)(quotingStatev.Teague,680S.W.2d785,788(Tenn.1984));seealsoStatev. D  Bigbee,885S.W.2d797,813(Tenn.1994);Statev.Nichols,877S.W.2d722,731(Tenn. ` 1994),cert.denied,513U.S.1114,115S.Ct.909(1995). ,  `  InStatev.Teague,897S.W.2d248(Tenn.1995),thesupremecourtheld t that [e]videncethatisadmissibleasbeingrelevanttotheissueofguiltorinnocencemayalsobeadmissibleataresentencinghearinginsupportofamitigatingcircumstance.Id.  \ at253.TheissueraisedonappealinTeaguewaswhetherthedefendantshouldbe ( allowedtopresentproofofinnocenceataresentencinghearing.Thesupremecourtnotedthatthe testforadmissibilityisnotwhethertheevidencetendstoprovethedefendantdidnotcommitthecrime,but,whetheritrelatestothecircumstancesofthecrimeortheaggravatingormitigatingcircumstances.Id.at252. %X $  `  Inthepresentcase,Stewartstestimonyattheresentencinghearingwasrelevanttothenatureandcircumstancesofthemurder,especiallytoshowtheappellantsmotiveandintent.Fromtherecord,itisclearthatracewasanintegraldynamicofthecircumstancessurroundingthismurder,andthejurywasentitledtohavethisbaseofknowledgeinsentencingtheappellant. `  Moreover,Stewartstestimonywasrelevanttorebutthestatutorymitigatingcircumstancesraisedbytheappellant.Amongothers,theappellantraisedthesestatutorymitigatingcircumstances:(1)theappellantactedunderextremeduressorunderthesubstantialdominationofanotherperson,and(2)thecapacityoftheappellantto 84: appreciatethewrongfulnessofhisconduct,ortoconformhisconducttotherequirementsofthelawwassubstantiallyimpairedasaresultofmentaldiseaseordefectorintoxication,whichwasinsufficienttoestablishadefensetothecrime,butwhichsubstantiallyaffectedhisjudgment.Tenn.CodeAnn.392203(j)(6),(8)(1982)(repealed).Thesemitigatingcircumstanceswereraisedtoofferanexplanationfortheappellantsparticipationinthemurder.Therefore,althoughStewartstestimonywaspresentedduringthestatescaseinchiefratherthaninrebuttal,itwasstillrelevanttorebutthemitigatingcircumstances.Stewarttestifiedafterthejurywasshowntheappellantsvideotapedstatementtothepolice.Inthisstatement,theappellantdepictedBrewingtonastheprimaryperpetratoroftheoffenseandattributedtheracistremarkstoBrewington.Clearly,Stewartstestimonywasofferedtorebuttheseclaimsbytheappellantinhisstatementtothepolice. `  Thestatewasalsoproperlyallowedtoaddressthisproofduringclosingarguments.Itiswellestablishedthat!XpXXXpclosingargumentmustbetemperate,mustbe  \ predicatedonevidenceintroducedduringthetrialofacase,andmustbepertinenttotheissuesbeingtried.Statev.Sutton,562S.W.2d820,823(Tenn.1978).#XpXX!XpE9#!XpXXXpԀTheprosecutor  maystateanultimateconclusionwhichwouldnecessarilyfollowifthetestimonyoftheprosecutionwitnesseswerebelievedbythejury.Statev.Brown,836S.W.2d530,552 <#" (Tenn.1992).Moreover,bothpartiesmustbegiventheopportunitytoarguenotonlythefactsintherecordbutanyreasonableinferencestherefrom.SeeRussellv.State,532 &$"& S.W.2d268,271(Tenn.1976).#XpXX!Xpp:#Ԁ!XpXXXp (#(  `  Basedingreatmeasureupontheroleoftheprosecutorinthecriminaljusticesystem,morerestrictionsareplacedonthestatethanthedefendant.Cokerv.State,911 .T). S.W.2d357,368(Tenn.Crim.App.1995).Accordingly, thestatemustrefrainfromargumentdesignedtoinflamethejuryandshouldrestrictitscommentarytomattersinevidenceorissuesattrial.Id.#XpXX!Xpܐ<#ԀHere,theprosecutorsargumentwasbasedonproofofthe h3.4 appellantsracialanimosityandthereasonableinferencethatitplayedasignificantroleintheappellantsparticipationinthismurder. 84:  `  Finally,evenifitwaserrortoadmitStewartstestimonyandtoallowthestatetoaddressthisproofduringclosingargument,sucherrorwasharmlessinthattheproofwascumulativeofotheradmissibleevidence.SeeHartmanv.State,896S.W.2d94,100 H 101(Tenn.1995).Theappellantmadeseveralracialcommentsduringhisvideotapedstatementtothepolice,whichwasviewedbythejury.Furthermore,Dr.Smalldon,thedefensesexpertwitness,admittedthattheappellantusedseveralracialepithetswhilebeinginterviewedbyhim.Dr.Smalldonalsotestifiedthattheappellanttoldhimallthree, [theappellant]andRogerandTammy,maderacialtauntingremarksatthevictim. @8 8 D[SectionIVProsecutorialMisconductDeleted]  , @ D V.CONSTITUTIONALITYOFTHEDEATHPENALTYSTATUTES  t  `  TheappellantraisesseveralchallengestotheconstitutionalityofTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection392203and205(1982)(repealed1989).Asacknowledgedbytheappellant,ourSupremeCourthasrepeatedlyrejectedthesearguments.See,e.g.,  Bigbee,885S.W.2dat81314;XpXXXpBrimmer,876S.W.2dat8788#XpXXXpܯD#XpXXXp;#XpXXXpE#ԀCazes,875S.W.2dat p!  26869;Statev.Hutchison,898S.W.2d161,17374(Tenn.1994),cert.denied,___U.S. <#" ___,116S.Ct.137,133L.Ed.2d84(1995);Statev.Bane,853S.W.2d483,48889 %X $ (Tenn.1993);Statev.Smith,857S.W.2d1,2124(Tenn.1993);Black,815S.W.2d166, &$"& 181,185;Statev.Melson,638S.W.2d342,36668,(Tenn.1982). (#(  `  Asanintermediateappellatecourt,itisbeyondourstatutoryfunctiontooverruletheholdingsofoursupremecourt.SeeReimannv.Huddleston,883S.W.2d135, .T). 137(Tenn.App.1993),perm.app.denied󛀜(Tenn.1994).Thus,wedeclinetheinvitation / +0 torevisittheseissueswhichhavepreviouslybeendecided. @ D[SectionVI.\P\\P\\R\\r\\O\\o\\P\\p\\O\\o\\R\\r\\T\\t\\I\\i\\O\\o\\N\\n\\A\\a\\L\\l\\I\\i\\T\\t\\Y\\y\񛀜\R\\R\\E\\e\\V\\v\\I\\i\\E\\e\\W\\w\񀄀Deleted]  4506 \  84: \\ \\\Section\\\\]@-D]\VI\\I\\.\] p ]]CONCLUSION]\ \  \\] ` ]\\]\\ ` ] ` ] ]Wehavecarefullyconsideredtheissuesraisedbytheappellantastotheresentencinghearingandhavedeterminedthatnonehasmerit.Accordingly,weaffirmtheappellantssentenceofdeath.