Menu Log In Sign Up The courts also consider the other information available to defense counsel, such as pretrial statements, and they look for such indicia of prejudice as requests for recesses and poorly prepared cross-examinations. 875 S.W.2d 253 (1994) | Cited 9 times . 1976). Nevertheless, when the state instructs a witness not to talk to defense counsel and defendant's trial preparation is thereby hindered, or other prejudice results, due process may be violated. Shortly before trial, the Defendant moved for a continuance on four grounds: (1) to take the testimony or deposition of George Tippens, an investigating officer who had moved to Florida; (2) to investigate additional suspects in the case whose names had been supplied to the defense on January 19, 1990; (3) to examine the door to the victim's bedroom; and (4) to permit FBI Agent Doug Dedrick to testify. 2d 82; or where the statement is not exculpatory and there was no advantage to the government in non-production, United States v. Principe, 499 F.2d 1135 (1st Cir.1974). The Defendant, Gary June Caughron, appeals directly to this Court his conviction of first degree premeditated murder and the sentence of death imposed by the jury, and his convictions of first degree burglary, and assault with intent to commit rape. On cross-examination, however, she conceded that Caughron was not insane and could conform his conduct to the dictates of the law. See also Boone v. Paderick, 541 F.2d 447 (4th Cir.1976); United States v. Sutton, 542 F.2d 1239 (4th Cir.1976). It fails to take into account the fact that almost half this period of time, nine hours, was spent in court during the course of the trial. Although instructing a witness not to talk with defense counsel may constitute a due process violation, some courts, emphasizing the requirement of prejudice, have found no constitutional error when the defendant does not appear to have been harmed by the misconduct. The record does not support any allegation that the State has failed to comply with its duties under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S. Ct. 1194, 10 L. Ed. After looking at a newspaper article mentioning the homicide, the Defendant told Haynes that he thought his girlfriend was "snitching" on him. The prosecution did, however, insist that she be kept at home and then took advantage of her vulnerability and fear of punishment by advising her mother not to let April discuss the case with the defendant's attorneys. Such a deprivation violates the right-to-counsel provision found in Article I, Section 9 of the Tennessee Constitution, as well as the Sixth Amendment of the federal constitution. Its misplacement in Rule 16 caused some confusion. 1973). The Defendant first avers that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion for a continuance. The trial of this case lasted four days. We find no reversible error. These were objections ordinarily made when and if the potentially objectionable testimony occurred. 2d 186 (1978). Based on this evidence, presented over four days of trial, the jury found the Defendant not guilty of felony-murder, robbery, and larceny, but guilty of premeditated first-degree murder, first-degree burglary, and assault with intent to commit rape. Of course, no post-hoc pronouncement of competency by the trial court can make up for the fact that counsel was hobbled in his representation of Caughron by the denial of his motion for a Rule 26.2(d) recess. Gary J. Aguirre. The verdict and judgment are supported by material evidence, and the sentence of death is in no way arbitrary or disproportionate. The court denied counsel's request for another night in which to review the statements. With a few exceptions, see, e.g., Tenn.R.Evid. Ward was a young and highly emotional witness and at times it was necessary to lead her "to develop" her testimony. Get free summaries of new Tennessee Supreme Court opinions delivered to your inbox! MG100 Coach. According to April, Jones cried and pleaded with them not to hurt her, but the two told her she was going to die. In D. Paine, Tennessee Law of Evidence, 611.6 (2nd ed. 804(b)(5). Although the record does not show the exact time that court resumed following this recess, the hour must have been very close to 5:00 p.m., which was the trial judge's previously announced adjournment time. At least one state court has applied harmless error analysis to the violation of production rule. 02/14/94 STATE TENNESSEE v. VICTOR JAMES CAZES . Similar beating of a victim was held to support a finding of aggravating circumstance (i)(5) in State v. Barber, 753 S.W.2d 659, 668 (Tenn. 1988); State v. McNish, 727 S.W.2d 490, 494 (Tenn. 1987); and State v. Cone, 665 S.W.2d 87, 94-95 (Tenn. 1984). 2. This advance production satisfied the State's duty under Rule 26.2 and avoided the needless delay of the trial. The Defendant insists that certain testimony of April Ward and her mother, Lettie Cruze, concerning statements made by the victim was inadmissible hearsay. 1972). 793 F.2d at 413. Unfortunately, in the name of expediency, that opportunity was not forthcoming. View Gary June Caughron's Criminal Record Alias (es) Canghorn, Gary June 608 and 609, the trial court is given broad discretion in the timing of its decisions on the admissibility of evidence. Obviously, the error in this case could not be considered harmless under any of the foregoing formulations. However, the Tennessee rule applies to all pretrial motions under Rule 12(b). Unable to complete the sex act with Jones, the Defendant suggested sex with April. These depictions are certainly not pleasant, but they are not shocking or gruesome. Phillips had given a statement to law enforcement officials on July 15, 1987, in which he stated that two persons, a man and a woman who were not the defendant and April Ward, had approached him about robbing and killing a woman in Pigeon Forge, possibly the victim Dorothy Ann Jones, although Phillips did not give the woman's name. A similar error occurred in this case. 1991), the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals reversed a conviction after the district attorney sent letters to prospective witnesses asking them not to discuss the case without a government attorney present. In Hinton, the defense attorney was "harried" through her own fault, while in this case counsel was "harried" by the action of the trial court. 1981). Brown was a patrolman with the Sevier County Sheriff's Department who had investigated the Defendant when he received a call on July 13, 1987, about Defendant's car being in a ditch. Defense counsel repeatedly asked to approach the bench prior to the testimony of certain State's witnesses to present motions in limine objecting to the admission of matters that might potentially come out during the witnesses' testimony. Jun 2022 - Present11 months. Under State v. Banks, 564 S.W.2d 947 (Tenn. 1978), the trial court did not abuse its discretion in permitting their introduction.
Gary Caughron - Address & Phone Number | Whitepages The sentence will be carried out as provided by law on the 10th day of August, 1993, unless otherwise ordered by this Court or by other proper authority. [8] And, no bloody shot-glasses were found at the scene of the crime. Where a juror is not legally disqualified or there is no inherent prejudice, the burden is on the Defendant to show that a juror is in some way biased or prejudiced. Gary R Caughron from Granite City, IL Also known as: Mr Gary R Caughron, Mr Gary Caughron Age: 61 years old Mobile number (618) 876-9480 Marital status Single Landline number (618) 344-4510 Gender Male Occupation ads view occupation Born June 21, 1961 Email addresses gcaughron@excite.com garyc2500@yahoo.com More about Gary R Caughron Contact Info Jencks caused some controversy in the months after it was announced, centering on fears that it would force government prosecutors to turn over investigatory files, in their entirety, upon defense demand. Finally, it must be emphasized that the majority's calculation that defense counsel had 22 hours in which to "study and reflect on the pretrial statements of April Ward" (and some 20 other witnesses) is purely illusory. On the right buttock were "three linear imprints, superficial bruises that fit perfectly with four fingers of a hand."
Gary J. Aguirre - Wikipedia The phone lines to the house had been cut. She said that the Defendant instructed her to bring a towel and a knife "to gut" Ann Jones. Supreme Court of Tennessee, at Knoxville. The State asserts, correctly under T.R.A.P. Without any realistic gauge with which to measure the extent of prejudice to the defendant as a result of the due process violations apparent in this record, I conclude that the only appropriate relief is to grant the defendant a new trial, at which the defense will have the benefit of the discovery and disclosure that it should have had prior to and during the first trial. For the reasons set out above, I dissent from the majority's decision to affirm the defendant's conviction in this case. denied 429 U.S. 821, 97 S. Ct. 69, 50 L. Ed. He was 79. Finally, in United States v. Moceri, 359 F. Supp. She described her nephew as "slow" and said that he had a good attitude since he had been in jail. We are of the opinion that defense counsel, and his defense team, were given a reasonable opportunity to examine and prepare to use the statements in cross-examining April Ward. Ogle had been a boyfriend of Teresa Goad, one of the victim's daughters. App. Given the centrality of April Ward's testimony, the inherent unreliability which attaches to that testimony by virtue of the half-dozen contradictory statements she made over a five-month period prior to trial, and the trial court's failure to grant counsel a reasonable period of time in which to capitalize upon those various pretrial statements, it appears that the Rule 26.2(d) error in this case was prejudicial. The defense sought to show that, despite a thorough and meticulous investigation, there was absolutely no evidence connecting Defendant with the crime scene. The admission of expert testimony is largely in the discretion of the trial judge. denied, 459 U.S. 1137, 103 S. Ct. 770, 74 L. Ed. But, at least initially, she was not a cooperative witness. A plaster cast of a shoe print found outside the house was consistent with a boot owned by Kenneth Ogle. Join Facebook to connect with Gary Caughron and others you may know. Noting the conclusions of the Seventh, Tenth, Third and Eighth Circuits, that court held that "[t]he point in the trial when a disclosure is made is not in itself determinative . 373 U.S. at 84, 83 S. Ct. at 1195. The trial court did not err in admitting the testimony. Our examination of the record shows at least five occasions when Defendant objected to the State's questioning of Ward as leading. One time when asked who had killed Ann Jones, Defendant stated, "Whoever done it needs help." This constitutional violation is made all the more egregious by the fact that the trial court took note that it was imminent, but did nothing to prevent it. We therefore affirm the conviction of first degree murder and the sentence of death. The Defendant also challenges comments by the court during the direct examination of T.B.I. Because she knew that her mother would have disapproved of her relationship with the Defendant if she had known his true age, April had told her mother that the Defendant was 18. In response to the defendant's pretrial "Brady motion" seeking pretrial disclosure of material evidence favorable to the defense the prosecutor failed to provide defense counsel with copies of April Ward's prior inconsistent statements. Dr. Blake's testimony was that the head injuries would have rendered her unconscious. A third inmate, Bobby Floyd, testified that Defendant told him that the victim was a "bitch," who had threatened to "tell some girl's mother how old he was;" that the only evidence police had against him was an article of clothing with blood on it; and that "the only mistake he [had] made was involving April.". This last statement was incorrect; but the proof elsewhere, including the photographs and McFadden's subsequent testimony as well as the court's own comments, made the mistake patent to the jury so that the Defendant could not have been prejudiced by the misstatement. On the afternoon of Friday, July 10, around 3:00 or 4:00 p.m., the Defendant came by April's house in an older model green and white 442 Oldsmobile Cutlass that he had just purchased. Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure 26.2(a) (emphasis added). April later testified that after the Defendant hit Jones several times with the pool stick, Jones fell across her bed, became silent and stopped moaning. Ogle said that he had turned over the package of witness statements to his investigator to review overnight, and that he had been able to read only one of April Ward's statements in the interim. Finally, April testified, Caughron insisted that they drink some of the victim's blood from shot glasses that he produced for the occasion. His fingerprints were not found in the house. The majority "emphasize[s] that this case does not involve the denial of Rule 26.2 statements." See State v. Jenkins, 733 S.W.2d 528, 532 (Tenn. Crim. Atty., Sevierville, for appellee. The court, finding "nothing that unfairly affected or handicapped appellants in preparation for trial," held that due process was not violated because defendant could show no prejudice to his case. Another time he said, "If I'm convicted of what I've done, someone will have to pay." George Edward Hardin. Id. [2] So long as a witness is of sufficient capacity to understand the obligation of an oath or affirmation, and some rule or statute does not provide otherwise, the witness is competent. These injuries were consistent with those caused by a blunt or rounded object and would have rendered Jones unconscious at some point. Moreover, appellate judges are in a poor position to second-guess counsel on the question of whether a recess to permit full utilization of the statements in this case would have been efficacious. at 778. Gary June Concord, MA Barnes and Noble Education (BNED) VP--Head of Institutional Sales (Oct 2019 - Apr 2021) Florida State University Certificate (2001 - 2002) Media professional, angel investor, coach Gary June Columbus, Ohio Police Officer - Department of Gary June Portsmouth, OH Sales Director Gary & June Thompson Arlington, TX Gary June The Defendant specifically complains of the trial court's interruption of his cross-examination of Christy Jones Scott and of Officer Sam Owenby, both of which interruptions were apparently attempts to keep the examination moving along; and of the court's statements during the cross-examination of Dr. Cleland Blake that what the doctor had told the jury was "just what he's told them" and that questions about why the doctor took fingernail clippings were academic and the answer obvious to anyone who had watched the television show Quincy.
The Tennessean from Nashville, Tennessee Page 40 Moreover, it has been held that the failure of an attorney to seek a recess for the purpose of reviewing recently proffered Jencks material (instead the defense attorney tried to read through the documents while direct examination was in progress) constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel, yet another Sixth Amendment deprivation. Some of the questions objected to were leading, some were not. For there can be no dispute, given the facts of this case, that the error committed by the trial court was prejudicial. The Defendant had also talked to Huskey about tying up women during sex and said that "slapping them on the butt really turned him on.". For example, in Clancy v. United States, 365 U.S. 312, 81 S. Ct. 645, 5 L. Ed. 1980); see also State v. Taylor, 669 S.W.2d 694, 698-700 (Tenn. Crim. Gary Caughron works at James M Russ II - Connect Realty, which is a Real Estate company. The Hinton court faulted the attorney for failing to seek "adequate time to make an informed tactical decision as to the use of the information contained in the [statements]," thereby producing "a harried trial attorney, attending to direct examination with one part of her consciousness, and with the *555 other rifling through the `massive Jencks material' in a hurried attempt to isolate and scan the relevant documents." When she returned to the bedroom, she saw the Defendant striking Jones's back with the pool stick. 1975). When court resumed the next morning at 9:00 a.m., the defendant's lead attorney, Carl R. Ogle, told the trial judge even before the first witness was called that he appreciated having received copies of the witnesses' statements the night before, but that he had not had a chance to review all the material that had been turned over to him. The court therefore specifically instructed the jury that it had acted, not to emphasize that part of the charge, but to "comport exactly" with the law. As a result, defense counsel was forced to begin cross-examination under circumstances amounting to a deprivation of Rule 26.2 statements that were rightfully his to inspect. He was a member of Maples Branch Baptist Church and was retired from the City of Pigeon Forge. The motion is . The majority's recapitulation of the evidence in this case demonstrates that the testimony of the defendant's teenaged accomplice, April Ward, was not only crucial to the state's case against Gary Caughron, it was the state's case against him. For example, in a case very close on its facts to the one now before us, the prosecution turned over Jencks material to defense counsel on a Sunday morning at 10:00 a.m., preceding the start of a three-day trial the next day, Monday. The Defendant, Gary June Caughron, appeals directly to this Court his conviction of first degree premeditated murder and the sentence of death imposed by the jury, and his convictions of first degree burglary, and assault with intent to commit rape. Nichols, 581 So. Houston, Texas, United States. The majority opinion contains a brief history of Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 26.2 and its genesis in federal law, and a passing reference to State v. Taylor, 771 S.W.2d 387 (Tenn. 1989), the only reported decision of this Court directly interpreting Rule 26.2. 40-2441, enacted in 1963, permitted pretrial discovery of a confession or statement against interest made by the accused. No hearsay was involved. Nevertheless, the trial judge not only forced defense counsel to begin his cross-examination of April Ward at that late hour, but he also failed to recess until cross-examination was completed, some considerable period of time later that evening. The expectations placed on defense counsel in this case were completely unrealistic, and they resulted in a deprivation of due process with respect to his client. But in February, the City Council rejected the Cavallis . 264, 195 So. In United States v. Peter Kiewit Sons' Co., 655 F. Supp. See State v. West, 767 S.W.2d 387 (Tenn. 1989); State v. O'Guinn, 709 S.W.2d 561 (Tenn. 1986); State v. Alley, 776 S.W.2d 506 (Tenn. 1989). Defense counsel apparently did not know until he received these documents from the prosecutor that April Ward had made six separate statements to police. The reviewing court found an abuse of discretion amounting to a violation of the defendants' rights under the Jencks Act and ordered a new trial. Ward testified that she and Caughron also sat on the floor and drank Jones' blood from shot glasses. At the very least, the majority should offer some guidance on the nature and extent of the trial court's discretion in this area of *550 the law and should set standards for determining when an abuse of that discretion has occurred. Tennessee had the highest population of Caughron families in 1840. The State asserts that this issue should be treated as waived because, as the State correctly points out, the Defendant has failed to cite to the location in the record of the specific questions of which he complains. The cause may be different, but the result is the same.
Grady B Caughron (1919 - 2007) - Johnson City, TN Bentley testified that the rags matched the towelling that he was shown at trial, which had been tied around the victim's body. The majority here finds no error in the trial court's ruling. When, in the summer of 1988, Tim McGaha had asked the Defendant if he had committed the murder, Caughron "just smiled." The court found it "grossly unfair" to permit this kind of prosecutorial misconduct, which had "unfairly hampered the defendants' investigation." The Defendant asserts that Phillips' recantation is a lie, pointing out that no reward was being offered on July 15, 1987. v. ", Jimmy Lynn Huskey testified that in 1986, when he and the Defendant were friends, the Defendant had a pool stick that came apart like the one Ward had described and that Defendant kept light-colored lace table cloth or curtain material in his car similar to the sheer material used to tie up Jones.
Caughron Genealogy | WikiTree FREE Family Tree Boulder, CO. Jeff Conte. Prior to trial, the court granted the Defendant's request for a competency hearing as to Ward, then seventeen, because she was a juvenile. To use a colloquialism that summarizes the situation most descriptively, Caughron's attorneys were effectively "stone-walled" by state officials involved in the investigation and prosecution of this case. April Ward's mother, Lettie Marie Cruze, worked at the Turquoise Jewelry Shop in Settler's Village, a group of shops in Pigeon Forge. When the trial judge responded *552 that he was "powerless to require the Attorney General to do something the rules and the law do not require," that is, to order early production of the statements, Ogle made the following, thoroughly reasonable response: The trial judge denied defense counsel's request for a recess on the ground that the "material is not that complex. Put simply, the price of saving less than a half-hour of trial time turned out to be "penny wise but pound foolish.". In my judgment, the violation of subsection (d) in this case is so clear that the only remaining question concerns the relief that should be granted in light of this error. Hence, I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion. The most Caughron families were found in USA in 1880. Also, the language of T.R.E. Subsection (d) states that the court "may recess proceedings in the trial for the examination of such statement and for preparation for its use in the trial." In 1940, in the year that Shelby Caughron was born, in July, Billboard published its first Music Popularity Chart. When Bentley had asked the Defendant why he wanted to paint the car, Caughron replied, "Well, the lady that got killed, somebody might recognize it and I need to paint it. [3] In Brady, the defendant requested the out-of-court statements of his companion during the murder. Later that same morning, several witnesses saw the Defendant when he arrived at Settler's Village around 10:00-11:00 a.m. Caughron was wearing only cut-off jeans and tennis shoes; he had scratches on his back, stomach and face. The boot comment was one episode of this behavior. In turn, he denied knowing the victim, denied any involvement in her death, and denied his actions the day after the killing. About. Gary June Caughron. 601 ("Every person of sufficient capacity to understand the obligation of an oath or affirmation is competent to be a witness except as otherwise provided in these rules or by statute.") The Defendant avers that the trial court's denial of counsel's request for sufficient time to review the statements under Rule 26.2(d) constitutes reversible error. Furthermore, the court's actions did not reflect the trial court's views on the Defendant's innocence or its opinion of the merit of Defendant's proof.
PDF Supreme Court of Tennessee State List for Permission to Appeal Style App. During *540 cross-examination of April Ward, when defense counsel asked Ward why she had lied to law enforcement officers regarding whom she had told about the crime, a juror whispered loudly, "What's the difference?" Gary June CAUGHRON, Appellant. 2d 603 (1967). As a result, defense counsel was not only prevented from gathering information that could have been developed from interviewing April Ward. A due process violation requires more than the suppression of significant exculpatory evidence, however. ), cert. Michael Caughron was born on 09/19/1963 and is 59 years old. Top recordings of the year were Tommy Dorsey's "I'll Never Smile Again" (vocal Frank Sinatra) - 12 weeks at the top, Bing Crosby's "Only Forever" - 9 weeks at the top, and Artie Shaw's "Frenesi" - 12 weeks at the top. 73 (D.Colo. It is not clearly established in the record that the State violated Rule 16(a)(1)(A); but, if the State did violate the Rule, the Defendant has not shown any actual prejudice caused by failure to comply with the discovery order which would require exclusion of this evidence. 134), followed by Petitioner's surreply on August 15, 2017. CAUGHRON, ROY W. - age 54, of Sevierville, passed away Friday, January 11, 2013. Caughron said that he stayed at his grandmother's house on the night of the killing and had been riding around with a friend and his wife at the time of the murder. Gary R Caughron 1933 - 1993. Her skull had been fractured and the cartilage in her nose displaced by the beating. April and the Defendant, who was working on a nearby construction project, met on the covered portico (commonly referred to as "the porch") of Settler's Village almost every day. April 27, 2023. (Doc. In order to clarify the purpose and timing of the production of witness statements at trial, the provisions formerly contained in Rule 16(a)(1)(E) and (F) were recast as Rule 26.2 in 1984. They used to work at Ruidoso Residential Properties. Tom Bentley, who worked on the Defendant's car sometime after the killing, testified that he had used pieces of blue terry cloth towel from the trunk of the Defendant's car as grease rags. 2d 215 (1963), or Rule 16, T.R.Cr.P. This testimony, according to Defendant, would tend to show that the victim never had a chance to bring in her groceries before she died and thus was first attacked outside the house. 39-13-204(d), specifically grants the State the right of closing. At trial, he testified that the Defendant appeared nervous and had a small cut on his face. Over 10 years of leadership and team building that collaborate to save . The testimony concerning the pool stick, the table cloth material, and slapping women on the buttocks was relevant to connect Defendant to this crime and corroborate the accomplice's testimony. What is not *551 included in the majority opinion is a recitation of the procedural background of the trial, putting in context the "Jencks motion" made by defense counsel at various points during the proceedings. Gary Robert Caughron was born on month day 1933, at birth place, Missouri, to Edward Wright Caughron and Alleen Inez Caughron (born Long). At trial the Defendant elicited from Christy Jones Scott the testimony that she had unloaded two or three bags of laundry detergent from her mother's truck after she had found her mother.