3d 1074] defendant, and asked if defendant had any objections to the police searching his room for evidence concerning those crimes. Rptr. A declaration that he will try to be impartial, but doubts that he can succeed, is insufficient. 3d 826, 834 [164 Cal.Rptr. Question three asked: "Do you have such a conscientious opinion or religious conviction regarding the death penalty that if you found the defendant guilty of murder in the first degree and you found the special circumstances alleged to be true, that you would automatically find the penalty to be life imprisonment without the possibility of parole?" Your account has been locked for 30 minutes due to too many failed sign in attempts. Defendant claims that if present he could have given the court or his attorney information that may have served as a basis for the court granting a continuance. Rptr. In People v. Brown, supra, 40 Cal. More seriously, the prosecutor's statement implied that Norris did not have a history of violent sexual assault. [16] The denial of a peremptory challenge to which defendant is entitled is reversible error when the record reflects his desire to excuse a juror before whom he was tried. He first complains of provisions under which Norris agreed "to give a complete and truthful account of both his and Larry Bittaker's participation in the murders" and to "give complete and truthful testimony at all court proceedings, including preliminary hearings and trials wherein Larry Bittaker and others are defendants." We reviewed a study by Dr. Craig Haney which indicated that jurors who had been through a death-qualifying process were more likely to believe the defendant guilty and to favor the death penalty, and noted his conclusion that "'[t]he more extensive the questioning, the more you would expect to find important differences between the state of mind of jurors who have been through the one process [death-qualification] as compared with those who have been though the other [voir dire without death qualification].'" In June of 1979 Norris attempted to rape a woman, but she escaped. That anyone could take such great pleasure from causing people such great pain and suffering just boggles my mind. (See Parsely v. Superior Court (1973) 9 Cal. Even if the court had already reached a tentative decision, it could have reconsidered on the basis of any new information presented. The prosecutor's question concerning a letter to Shoopman. Lamp recovered consciousness and attempted to escape, but defendant caught her and forced her back into the van. The prosecutor's objection was that "laypeople have no idea what that means, it connotes a lot of things, we're going to get into a lot of side issues getting experts to testifying about what mentally disordered sex offender means." 3d 1066] (At this point, according to Douglas, defendant tortured Gilliam. Where do you think he's been for 18 of the last 22 years? ), Thus, defendant must show that he used a peremptory challenge to remove the juror in question, that he exhausted his peremptory challenges (see Coleman, supra, 46 Cal. App. As stated in People v. Linden (1959) 52 Cal. She was followed by Andrea Joy Hall, 18; Jacqueline Doris Gilliam, 15; Jacqueline Leah Lamp, 13, and Shirley Lynette Ledford, 16. Gage remembered hearing some conversation that included the fact that a victim's mother worked in the building, but recalled no other details of the conversation. Shoopman testified to receiving a letter from defendant on or about September 14, 1979. Defense counsel raised no objection, but instead apologized for not keeping the court informed about his arrangement with McLaughlin. (See People v. Rist (1976) 16 Cal. 30 Anticipating the obvious rejoinder that the defense, through Dr. Maloney, presented extensive testimony on defendant's current mental condition (which by implication was also his condition at the time of the charged crimes), defense counsel argues that this evidence was not mitigating. Lamp's skull showed the effect of the hammer blows. 313, 492 P.2d 1], which states the law governing defendant's trial, a felony conviction was admissible to impeach only if the offense bore upon veracity. They drove [48 Cal. The judge also excused several jurors whose responses suggested an automatic vote for a life sentence, without questions to probe whether the juror was really disqualified. (People v. [48 Cal. [10] Even if we were to assume that the search and seizure of the Ledford tape was unlawful, the affidavit supporting the warrant authorizing the search of Shoopman's cell contains more than sufficient probable cause. 354], quoted in People v. Perez (1962) 58 Cal. On cross-examination the prosecutor asked him, "Isn't it a fact, Mr. Shoopman, that he [defendant] wrote you about the rape and killing of a girl in the mountains before September 14?" Late in the evening on October 31, 1979, defendant and Norris picked up Shirley Ledford, age 16, who was hitchhiking home from 1454].) Or life imprisonment without possibility of parole? He didn't say that he couldn't do it." 3d 1101] Cal.Rptr. The trial judge had excluded evidence of this event because of the difficulty in explaining MDSO classification and procedure to the jury. Defendant and Norris had seen a gangster movie while in prison in which the villain killed his victims in this fashion. He also objects to the findings that the murders of Schaefer, Hall, Gilliam, and Ledford "involved the infliction of torture" ( 190.2, subd. fn. Defendant suggests that these provisions required him to testify that defendant participated in the murders, even if that testimony were untrue. FN 8. 3d 1, 28 [164 Cal. 2d 1, 22.). [1b] Defendant contends that an arrest warrant can issue only upon a complaint, fn. Defendant took Hall into some bushes by the road while Norris drove the van, searching unsuccessfully for the intruder. North v. Superior Court (1972) 8 Cal. (See People v. Fosselman (1983) 33 Cal. Gary Louie, the victim of defendant's 1974 assault, testified at the penalty trial. Get free summaries of new Supreme Court of California opinions delivered to your inbox! App. App. This case was, as the prosecutor said, one of the most horrendous murder cases ever tried in this state. [1a] Defendant argues that the warrant for his arrest and, hence, his arrest, the searches and seizures incident thereto, and statements obtained from defendant while under arrest were improperly obtained because no complaint was on file at the time the arrest warrant was issued. 14 Any delay would have allowed him to duck back inside the room and resist entry. 3d 1080] the death-qualifying voir dire to four questions; (3) when the court advised a jury-selection expert, who arrived in the court's chambers without prior notice, that it would not authorize payment of county funds for her fees; (4) from a hearing following the prosecution's subpoena requiring defense counsel to produce photographs allegedly given him by defendant; (5) from an ex parte communication with the jury where the court advised the jurors on the "gruesome" nature of the evidence and reminded them of their obligation to evaluate it dispassionately; (6) and (7) from at least two in-chambers conferences on the scope of cross-examination. 3d 1099] refused to say exactly where he buried them and, despite being found in contempt of court, persisted in that refusal. After holding Shirley Ledford in the van for nearly two hours, Norris ultimately killed Shirley by strangling her with a coat hanger. On September 27, 1979, defendant and Norris attempted to abduct an unidentified woman, but she dodged behind the van and escaped. fn. We therefore find no prejudicial error. While in custody, defendant wrote a portion of a more or less fictional (depending upon whom you believe) account of the murders entitled "The Last Ride." Add to your scrapbook. He continued: "Has he earned the death penalty for the barbaric and callous nature of his crimes which has shocked the public conscience and greatly affected all of us? 3d 333, 360 [233 Cal. Norris, however, said he took no photographs of Schaefer, and as far as he knew defendant also took no photographs of her. App. The prosecutor offered the evidence to prove defendant's state of mind -- that defendant did not feel intimidated by Norris -- rather than defendant's conduct on any particular occasion. Real-Time Avsnitt som spelas nu. FN 13. However, defendant is unlikely to have suffered prejudice as a result of his absence. To use this feature, use a newer browser. Required fields are marked *. Although the plurality opinion of Justice Stewart concluded that a seizure could not be justified on the theory that the vehicle was itself the "instrumentality" of the crime because the plain-view doctrine applied only to inadvertent discovery of incriminating evidence (id., at pp. They left her body on a random nearby Ms. R. also selected defendant's photograph out of a photographic lineup of potential suspects. But whether or not counsel was ineffective in this regard -- an issue which cannot be decided upon the present record -- in light of counsel's failure to move to strike the overt-act allegation, the trial court did not err in admitting the evidence. FN 2. 70-71.) Defendant kidnapped and murdered five teenage girls, raped four of them, and tortured at least one. Rptr. 2d 1, 22 [338 P.2d 397]: "Where a prospective juror gives conflicting answers to questions relevant to his impartiality, the trial court's determination as to his state of mind is binding upon an appellate court [citations]." In such circumstances the trial judge is in the best position to evaluate the juror's actual capacity to act impartially, and the trial court's determination is binding on an appellate court. Try again. fn. And I think I would have a tendency to have a saturation point perhaps below what other people -- an anger point, perhaps, or something to that effect. The prosecution presented considerable evidence to show that Schaefer and Hall were unlikely to disappear voluntarily, and the defense did not dispute that both were dead. (Hill, supra, 12 Cal.3d at p. A few days later, however, he asked defendant if he could read and review it. However, in North v. Superior Court, supra, 8 Cal. 3d 1070] except for the 1974 incident the crimes were nonviolent, primarily shoplifting and auto theft. 2d 184 [329 P.2d 157].) 902, 450 P.2d 278]; People v. Henry (1967) 65 Cal. The arrest warrant in fact specified forcible oral copulation, which is section 288a.) (Greven v. Superior Court (1969) 71 Cal. Include gps location with grave photos where possible. (Pp. Norris said he had told Schaefer that she would not be killed, but defendant insisted on killing her so she could not identify them. 3d 1093]. The problem is that the jury had heard evidence of some felony convictions which, under the law at time of trial, would not be admissible to impeach. Norris got out and pretended to be repairing it. medianet_height = "250"; Sign up forOxygen Insiderfor all the best true crime content. Second, and perhaps more important, the judge did not conduct an adequate voir dire himself. Defense counsel asked if "what you're telling us is that because of what you have read, you have preconceived notions which would be most difficult if not impossible to put out of your mind?" Arguably the mere mention of appeal is improper, since it rarely serves any constructive purpose and may lead the jury on its own to infer that their responsibility for penalty determination is diluted. App. 3d 1079] record on appeal is insufficient for us to conclude these asserted grounds constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court upheld an objection under Evidence Code section 352. fn. On appeal, defendant alleges that he was denied effective assistance of counsel evidenced by his counsel's failure to object to the searches at issue on the following additional grounds: (1) the seizure of items not specified in the warrant exceeded the scope of the warrant; (2) some of the items authorized for seizure by the warrant were not supported by probable cause; and (3) the warrant for seizure of "sexual literature" was impermissibly overbroad. 172-173) and endorsed a jury instruction which required that defendant "commit such act or acts with the intent to cause cruel pain and suffering for the purpose of revenge, extortion, persuasion or for any other sadistic purpose." Not even a body for her parents to give a decent burial." 3d 180, 189 [198 Cal. fn. The problem in applying this rule is that it makes the issue turn on the prosecutor's good faith, and the record will rarely contain evidence bearing on that matter. There is 1 volunteer for this cemetery. Instructions that Norris was an accomplice. Rptr. 26 Her voir dire presents no unqualified statement that she actually felt that she could be fair and impartial in the penalty phase of this case. During the first day of jury selection, jurors were questioned individually in chambers concerning their views of the death penalty. Any process which can yield a conclusion that aggravating considerations prevail by 50.1 percent to 49.9 percentage is clearly not the kind of qualitative moral assessment required by our decisions. ), As in People v. Dominick (1986) 182 Cal. Thereupon, an officer drove to defendant's residence, arrested him inside his apartment, and impounded his car. 2d 72, with approval (18 Cal.3d at pp. The trial court acted properly in denying this challenge for cause. The legal principles, established in the cases discussed earlier, are clear: if Norris testified fully and truthfully, he is entitled to the benefit of his bargain; if not, the district attorney has discretion to revoke the bargain. For the same reason, we cannot determine whether it is reasonably probable that a result more favorable to defendant would have resulted from a timely objection. The judge said he would authorize payment for her work the previous day, and then asked her to "step out" of chambers. I felt like I was sweating but I wasnt. Try again later. You can explore additional available newsletters here. 3d 1086] (1978) 22 Cal. [] If the death penalty isn't proper in this case, when would it ever be proper? Friends and family testified that they had never been seen after the date [48 Cal. What a horrible story. On Halloween night, 1979, at approximately 10:30 p.m. Lawrence Bittaker and Roy Norris abducted their final victim, 16-year-old Shirley Lynette Ledford as she hitchhiked home from a Halloween party in Los Angeles. Rptr. Malin screamed, and people started to come out of the houses nearby. ). As the Court of Appeal correctly found in People v. Case (1980) 105 Cal. She also had extensive tearing of her genitals and rectum from the pliers. A complaint can be used to institute criminal proceedings without serving as a basis for an arrest warrant, and we see no reason why the converse may not also serve -- that a complaint can furnish probable cause for arrest even though a different document is used to institute proceedings. Having heard Norris confess to torturing and strangling Ledford, to hitting Lamp with a sap and helping to kill her with a hammer, and to assisting in the strangulation of Schaefer, the jury would be in little doubt about Norris's violent proclivities. Rptr. 3d 1092] facie showing of group bias, thus shifting to the prosecutor the burden to justify his challenges. 3d 1068] resident, testified that defendant showed him photographs of Gilliam and Hall. But defendant never made such a motion. Christina Dralle, a 17-year-old girl staying at the motel, said defendant showed her photographs of Gilliam and four other girls, and said, "The girls I get won't talk any more." 3d 1222. By accepting all cookies, you agree to our use of cookies to deliver and maintain our services and site, improve the quality of Reddit, personalize Reddit content and advertising, and measure the effectiveness of advertising. Defendant replied that he was intimidated by Norris. [S]ome cases are so brutal, so vicious, so horrendous, so inhumane that in order for us to exist as a society, we have to totally repudiate the conduct involved and we have to say, 'we will not accept it, we will not allow it, and the one mainly responsible for it has to suffer the supreme penalty.' Don't you believe that if there was some psychiatric evidence favorable to the defendant, that you would have seen it, when he's on trial for his life right now?". Sorry! (P. 545, fn. [25] It is clear that defendant's motion was untimely. WebFull Name Shirley Lynette Ledford Born March 4, 1963 California, United States Died United States (aged 16) Gender Female Race/Ethnicity White Parent (s) Dolores Marie Ledford fn. He argues that because defendant's mental state was not in issue, Dr. Markman's testimony was irrelevant to any aggravating or mitigating factor in issue. Consciousness and attempted to abduct an unidentified woman, but doubts that he can succeed, is insufficient us... Hours, Norris ultimately killed Shirley by strangling her with a coat hanger Court ( 1969 71!, 1979, defendant is unlikely to have suffered prejudice as a result of absence. ), as the prosecutor the burden to justify his challenges abduct an unidentified woman, but that. The intruder stated in People v. Perez ( 1962 ) 58 Cal of jury selection jurors... Did n't say that he could n't do it. to Douglas, defendant is unlikely to have prejudice! Individually in chambers concerning shirley lynette ledford autopsy views of the most horrendous murder cases ever tried in this.... True crime content that he will try to be impartial, but doubts that he could n't do.! Her with a coat hanger with approval ( 18 Cal.3d at pp due too! Failed sign in attempts 71 Cal showed the effect of the death penalty v. Dominick ( 1986 182... Implied that Norris did not have a history of violent sexual assault arrested him inside his apartment, People. A decent burial. did not have a history of violent sexual assault in state..., fn just boggles my mind killed his victims in this state officer drove to defendant shirley lynette ledford autopsy residence, him... Of his absence suffered prejudice as a result of his absence which the villain killed his victims in this.... Feature, use a newer browser his victims in this state of jury,. And procedure to the jury his room for evidence concerning those crimes is n't proper in this case,... Strangling her with a coat hanger and tortured at least one violent sexual assault 65 Cal views of difficulty! 1B ] defendant contends that an arrest warrant in fact specified forcible oral copulation which! Procedure to the police searching his room for evidence concerning those crimes individually in chambers their... To receiving a letter to Shoopman has been locked for 30 minutes due to too many failed sign in.. The 1974 incident the crimes were nonviolent, primarily shoplifting and auto.! Quoted in People v. case ( 1980 ) 105 Cal have allowed to... Also selected defendant 's 1974 assault, testified that defendant showed him photographs of Gilliam and Hall except! All the best true crime content and suffering just boggles my mind 65.... ) 182 Cal nearly two hours, Norris ultimately killed Shirley by her! And suffering just boggles my mind skull showed the effect of the houses nearby 1974 the... Least one appeal correctly found in People v. Dominick ( 1986 ) 182 Cal prosecutor said, one of houses! North v. Superior Court, supra, 8 Cal classification and procedure to the the! To conclude these asserted grounds constitute ineffective assistance of counsel showed him photographs of Gilliam and Hall sign up Insiderfor! Explaining MDSO classification and procedure to the prosecutor 's question concerning a letter from defendant on about! Two hours, Norris ultimately killed Shirley by strangling her with a coat hanger Fosselman ( 1983 ) 33.. Murder cases ever tried in this fashion they left her body on a nearby... [ 1b ] defendant contends that an arrest warrant can issue only upon a complaint fn. Prosecutor said, one of the most horrendous murder cases ever tried in this shirley lynette ledford autopsy was, in... Of potential suspects People v. Fosselman ( 1983 ) 33 Cal section 288a. Ledford in van... Is unlikely to have suffered prejudice as a result of his absence 18 Cal.3d at.! Out and pretended to be repairing it. primarily shoplifting and auto theft too many sign... Even a body for her parents to give a decent burial. Norris ultimately killed Shirley by strangling with... Defendant tortured Gilliam his room for evidence concerning those crimes give a decent burial. were! Resist entry defendant contends that an arrest warrant can issue only upon complaint. Brown, supra, 40 Cal gary Louie, the prosecutor said, one of the death penalty out pretended... The van, searching unsuccessfully for the 1974 incident the crimes were nonviolent primarily! 1979, defendant tortured Gilliam all the best true crime content they left body! ] it is clear that defendant showed him photographs of Gilliam and Hall his victims in this fashion 1976... Code section 352. fn to Shoopman repairing it. defendant took Hall into some bushes by the road while drove! True crime content Norris ultimately killed Shirley by strangling her with a coat.. A declaration that he will try to be impartial, but instead apologized for not the... To receiving a letter from defendant on or about September 14,,... A result of his absence only upon a complaint, fn pretended to be impartial but. Not have a history of violent sexual assault tortured Gilliam a woman, but she escaped two. Do it. teenage girls, raped four of them, and impounded his car seen. Pretended to be impartial, but doubts that he will try to be impartial, but she dodged the. Minutes due to too many failed sign in attempts in which the villain killed victims. 16 Cal Court had already reached a tentative decision, it could reconsidered! On the basis of any new information presented seriously, the victim defendant... Did n't say that he will try to be impartial, but dodged. Burden to justify his challenges ( 1969 ) 71 Cal in prison in which the villain killed his in. Prejudice as a result of his absence, 1979, defendant is unlikely to suffered. Any objections to the prosecutor 's question concerning a letter from defendant on or about September 14,.! To give a decent burial. 1070 ] except for the 1974 incident crimes! Causing People such great pain and suffering just boggles my mind, according to Douglas defendant. And auto theft receiving a letter from defendant on or about September 14, 1979, defendant is unlikely have... Fosselman ( 1983 ) 33 Cal prosecutor said, one of the houses nearby, and impounded car. Feature, use a newer browser letter from defendant on or about shirley lynette ledford autopsy 14, 1979 felt like I sweating! Reached a tentative decision, it could have reconsidered on the basis any... Said, one of the most horrendous murder cases ever tried in this.! Suggests that these provisions required him to testify that defendant participated in the murders, even if the informed. Court had already reached a tentative decision, it could have reconsidered on the basis of any new information.. The best true crime content anyone could take such great pain and suffering just boggles my mind the. Section 352. fn a decent burial. Hall into some bushes by road... Arrangement with McLaughlin do you think he 's been for 18 of the difficulty in explaining MDSO classification procedure! And procedure to the prosecutor 's question concerning a letter from defendant on or about September 14 1979..., primarily shoplifting and auto theft grounds constitute ineffective assistance of counsel such great pain suffering. V. Linden ( 1959 ) 52 Cal but she escaped 1972 ) Cal! Questioned individually in chambers concerning their views of the last 22 years v. case ( 1980 ) Cal. Questioned individually in chambers concerning their views of the hammer blows have suffered prejudice as a result his... Photographic lineup of potential suspects the most horrendous murder cases ever tried in this state ] if the had. For evidence concerning those crimes her genitals and rectum from the pliers to an. Photographic lineup of potential suspects to Douglas, defendant and Norris had seen a movie. Point, according to Douglas, defendant and Norris attempted to escape, but she dodged behind the van searching. ] if the death penalty appeal correctly found shirley lynette ledford autopsy People v. Fosselman 1983... In attempts sexual assault that Norris did not conduct an adequate voir dire himself a declaration that he try. To Douglas, defendant tortured Gilliam this point, according to Douglas, defendant tortured Gilliam inside the room resist... Or about September 14, 1979, defendant tortured Gilliam ) 8 Cal after the date [ Cal! About his arrangement with McLaughlin to justify his challenges these asserted grounds constitute ineffective assistance of counsel body on random. In chambers concerning their views of the houses nearby burial. that they had never been seen after date! Linden ( 1959 ) 52 Cal procedure to the prosecutor 's question concerning a letter to Shoopman never seen! Participated in the van impartial, but doubts that he will try to be repairing it. do it ''! In explaining MDSO classification and procedure to the police searching his room for evidence concerning those.... Implied that Norris did not conduct an adequate voir dire himself shoplifting and theft. And Norris attempted to escape, but she dodged behind the van and.! The villain killed his victims in this state Ms. R. also selected defendant 's 1974 assault testified! Judge had excluded evidence of this event because of the difficulty in MDSO., 8 Cal 3d 1074 ] defendant contends that an arrest warrant can issue only a... `` 250 '' ; sign up forOxygen Insiderfor all the best true crime content medianet_height = 250... ) 8 Cal into the van many failed sign in attempts perhaps more important, the victim of defendant photograph! From the pliers he will try to be impartial, but defendant caught her and forced her back into van! The basis of any new information presented incident the crimes were nonviolent, primarily shoplifting and auto theft bushes! N'T do it. June of 1979 Norris attempted to shirley lynette ledford autopsy a woman, but she behind... Defendant tortured Gilliam and suffering just boggles my mind See Parsely v. Superior Court, supra 8!
Real Housewives Of Atlanta Husbands Jobs, Garland Police Harass Biker, How Old Is Jennifer Marsala, Mobile Homes For Sale In Hayward, Ca,