It is well-settled in this circuit that when a communication is received from the jury, counsel should be informed of its substance and afforded an opportunity to be heard before a supplemental charge is given. denied, 528 U.S. 829 (1999). 3593(a). The agreement comes almost 24 years after Groves killing was ordered by New Orleans police officer Len Davis, who was angry over a complaint the mother of three made against him. As part of the settlement, the city has agreed to pay $1.5 million to Groves children over the course of four years. The Eighth Amendment requires that, in a capital case, the sentencing jury be able to consider and give effect to the defendant's mitigating evidence. A refusal to give a requested instruction constitutes reversible error only if the proposed instruction (1) is substantially correct, (2) is not substantively covered in the jury charge, and (3) pertains to an important issue in the trial, such that failure to give it seriously impairs the presentation of an effective defense. Id. The court overruled Davis's objection to the instruction that, to prove premeditation, [t]here is no requirement that the government prove that the defendant deliberated for any particular period of time. The jury ultimately found this factor proven beyond a reasonable doubt for each of the two counts of conviction. Id. We may not reverse or vacate a sentence of death on account of any error which can be harmless, including any erroneous special finding of an aggravating factor, where the Government establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the error was harmless. Id. The weighing is not numeric; the perceived significance, not the number, of aggravating and mitigating factors determines the decision. Jones, 527 U.S. at 408. Streed testified on direct regarding the effects of violent criminal activity on Davis's mental and physical health. The government must also establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the killing was committed after substantial planning for you to find this factor proved. The defense introduced the crime statistics during direct examination to support the theory that Davis was a product of the violent atmosphere in which he worked, thus opening the door to the Government's questions on cross-examination. [25] Then, in December 2022, another man was released from prison after more than 30 years who was also convicted based on false testimony from Davis.[26][27]. Each faces up to life in prison, while Davis could face the death penalty in connection with Groves' murder. Pennington said he immediately suspended the nine officers. Defense counsel offered correction to a typo but no substantive objections. Copyright 1996-2023, The Officer Down Memorial Page, Inc, Registration for the 2023 National Police Week 5K goes up $5 on March 2nd save on our introductory pricing and, register today to run or walk in your hometown, View As stated in Part III.B., supra, the jury was already aware that Davis and Hardy had been convicted for the murder of Groves, and that Hardy was the actual shooter. Davis has been in custody since Monday, when he was charged with ordering the murder of Kim Groves near her Alabo Street home. Further, the Government did not mention Poonie during any other point in the trial, and did not argue about Poonie or his war with Hardy in summation. The document also showed the percentage change for the two years. FN15. [A] prior decision of this [C]ourt will be followed without reexamination unless (i) the evidence on a subsequent trial was substantially different, (ii) controlling authority has since made a contrary decision of the law applicable to such issues, or (iii) the decision was clearly erroneous and would work a manifest injustice. Williams, 517 F.3d at 806-07 (citations omitted); Becerra, 155 F.3d at 752-53. Further, the testimony is reliable because both witnesses testified that they were familiar with Hardy's reputation from their own interactions with him and with Davis. One of the officers, a 5th District sergeant, is a commander. Id. Though Davis refused to be present in the courtroom during the selection phase, he permitted his back-up counsel to proceed without him. This briefing is insufficient for the purposes of Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 28(a), and therefore the issue is deemed waived. FN4. Fourth, in rebuttal closing summation, the prosecutor repeatedly described Davis as evil and described defense counsel as follows: Counsel talked to you in the beginning of his closing argument about killing. denied, 544 U.S. 1034 (2005). If a policeman killing a citizen using a drug dealer that he is protecting is not enough, then what is? We examine his claims in turn. In addition, the court's instructions regarding consideration of mitigation evidence ensured that the jurors considered the mitigation factors correctly. [8], In 1994, Davis beat a young man in New Orleans, mistaking him for a suspect in a police officer's shooting. Moreover, there was not inappropriate disparagement of Davis or defense counsel. The district court denied the motion, refusing to extrapolate from the Fifth Circuit's decision [in Causey] a determination that the Government did not prove its case for death with regard to Counts 1 and 2 because the evidence had been insufficient to sustain a conviction on Count 3. We affirmed the ruling. Davis further argues that the jury may have been confused because while imprisoned implied the length of time Davis would be incarcerated (and possibly released), while in prison denotes the fact that he would be incarcerated (with no release). A Giglio violation usually occurs when a cooperating witness denies having a plea agreement and the prosecutor fails to correct the misstatement. United States v. Williams, 343 F.3d 423, 439 (5th Cir. Id. Meanwhile, he said, agents kept a close eye on Davis and were prepared to arrest him at "any time of the day or night. Ride along with the police officers, the firefighters, and the paramedics as they tackle the evils of the night. United States v. Hardy, 34 F. App'x 962 (5th Cir.2002) (per curiam). Q. Upon conviction for a homicide, the FDPA provides for a separate, post-conviction penalty proceeding. Two men described as violent drug traffickers - Paul "Cool" Hardy and Damon Causey - have been charged in the Oct. 13 murder. Davis argues that intervening case law has created a contrary decision of the applicable law such that the law of the case doctrine does not apply. You see, ladies and gentlemen, this crime not only involved one victim, but 500,000 victims, the people of the city of New Orleans. We also determine whether it appears beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of did not contribute to the verdict obtained. Hall, 152 F.3d at 406 (citing Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 23 (1967)); see also 18 U.S.C. See 18 U.S.C. Officer Williams had served with the New Orleans Police Department for four years. 3593(b); see also Jones v. United States, 527 U.S. 373, 407-08 (1999). For example, the jury heard the FBI wiretap tapes in which Davis discussed with Hardy a murder he thought Hardy had ordered:And you can't go to jail for putting a hit on somebody, Paul. Penry v. Johnson, 532 U.S. 782, 797 (2001). Thereafter, Davis refused to return to the courtroom for the second stage of the re-sentencing, but permitted his back-up counsel to proceed in his absence. at 242. Government Exhibit LD-9 is the wiretap excerpt of a conversation between Hardy and Davis the evening of October 13, 1994, when Davis first mentions his desire for Hardy to kill Groves. See Bernard, 299 F.3d at 479-81 (holding that error in admitting minimal victim impact testimony in which victim's mother directly addressed defendants did not affect substantial rights in light of the impact on the family); see also Griffith v. Quarterman, 196 F. App'x 237, 245 (5th Cir.2006) (per curiam, unpublished) (in a habeas case, rejecting Due Process challenge to admissibility of victim impact evidence where only one witness (victim's brother) testified and prosecutor made only passing reference to testimony in closing argument); cf. Police procedurals are stasis machines. Here, the proposed instruction for a considerable or large amount of planning is substantively covered in the final jury charge, where substantial planning is defined as requiring a considerable amount of planning preceding the killing. As for the definition of substantial premeditation, there is no reasonable likelihood that the jury would have applied the instruction in a way that prevented consideration of evidence. Is that just? Although she didnt kill Officer Williams, she was just as guilty. 3592(c)(9)..FN15. Causey, 185 F.3d at 413-16; see also id. 405 U.S. at 154-55. Fourth, Davis asserts that omission of the FDPA elements from the indictment precluded the government from seeking the death penalty at re-sentencing. There is no requirement that the government prove that the defendant deliberated for any particular period of time in order to show premeditation. First, during closing arguments at the selection phase, prosecutors stated that sentencing Davis to life imprisonment for his convictions under 18 U.S.C. The investigation hits the Police Department at a time when the agency is reeling from several years of corruption, with more than 30 officers arrested in connection with a variety of crimes. ", In the days after the murder, the FBI overheard Davis and others planning other violent acts, Gallagher said. See Rogers v. Tennessee, 532 U.S. 451, 459-60 (2001) (noting the fair notice concerns underlying both the Due Process and Ex Post Facto Clauses). FN2. The email address cannot be subscribed. Further, the district court clearly instructed the jury at the beginning and end of both phases of the re-sentencing hearings that counsel's arguments are not evidence. He is survived by his wife and two young children. This is the account described in the documents: Shortly after Davis found out about the brutality complaint against him, he is quoted as muttering to himself as he dialed Hardy's beeper, "I can get P to come and do that whore now and then we can handle the 30." 20 years ago: Restaurant killings, officer's arrest rocked city, NOPD. July 17, 2001) (issuing writ of mandamus that Davis be permitted to represent himself); United States v. Davis, 285 F.3d 378, 385 (5th Cir.2002) (issuing another writ of mandamus finding appointment of independent counsel violated Davis's right to self-representation). Former NOPD Officer Matthew Dean Moore, who was working as Williams partner on the day of the beating, was sentenced to 70 months in prison for obstructing justice and for making false statements to the FBI During the eligibility phase of the penalty proceedings, Davis represented himself with appointed back-up counsel..FN6. 529 U.S. at 627. Defense counsel used these words after requesting permission from the district court to lead the witness. Jasmine Groves waits for you to give her justice. According to court documents Len Davis was under investigation by the Internal Affairs for the murder of a young man who he thought was a witness to an officer involved shooting. Davis became agitated as the evening progressed because Groves had not been killed yet. The testimony did not render the trial fundamentally unfair, as Davis's counsel was able to cross-examine Jasmine (and to ask leading questions). Davis did not appeal this ruling..FN9. On the day of Groves' murder, he and Davis In short, the government must prove the defendant killed Kim Groves only after substantially thinking the matter over and deciding to do it beforehand. Here, the jury decides whether the aggravating factors sufficiently outweigh statutory or non-statutory mitigating factors to warrant a death sentence or, absent mitigating factors, whether the aggravators alone warrant that sentence. Therefore, Davis suffered no prejudice. The district court denied the motion on October 20, 2005, because the issues presented had been decided in numerous motions before Davis's re-sentencing. Upon questioning by the prosecutor, he told jurors he was facing a mandatory five-year sentence and possible life sentence in prison on those charges. You give him life, you don't give him death, he won't be punished at all for killing, executing Kim Marie Groves. It must, however, show that the defendant had a considerable period of time to become fully aware of what he intended to do and to think it over before he acted. United States v. Jackson, 549 F.3d 963, 974-75 (5th Cir.2008), cert. 11. The 2005 re-sentencing jury was different from the jury that convicted Davis in 1996. WebLen Davis was a former New Orleans police officer who was sentenced to death for arranging the murder of a witness set to testify against him. [PROSECUTOR]: Back to coincidences now, your Honor. And he said, man, Paul Hardy ain't never killed nobody that didn't deserve to die. No products in the cart. Accordingly, Davis's substantial rights were not affected such that reversal of his sentence is warranted. As to the fifth type of remark to which Davis objected, in which the prosecutor characterized him as a cold-blooded killer, the district court did not abuse its discretion in overruling the objection. The verdict form also included a catch-all category: G.Other factors in Len Davis's background or character mitigate against imposition of a death sentence. Additionally, no exceptions to the law of the case doctrine apply. Director Deon Taylor Writer Peter A. Dowling Stars Naomie Harris Tyrese Gibson Frank Grillo See production, box office & company info Watch on Freevee Watch Free on Freevee More watch options A New Orleans cop has been arrested and suspended for allegedly withholding evidence involving the suspect charged in a fellow officer's shooting death, police said. "We're on a crusade. Davis's Batson claim does not fall within the exceptions to the law of the case doctrine. If a policeman killing a citizen using a drug dealer that he is protecting is not enough, then what is? Davis paged Hardy. What the fuck are you doing hanging out with a cold-blooded killer like Paul Hardy? If a policeman killing a citizen using a drug dealer that he is protecting is not enough, then what is?. Compare, e.g., People v. Kuntu, 752 N.E.2d 380, 403 (Ill.2001) (We find error in allowing the State to argue to the jury that, if it should fail to vote to sentence defendant to death, the jury will be giving the jury five free murders.), with Rodden v. Delo, 143 F.3d 441, 447 (8th Cir.1998) (In context, the prosecutor's statement about the second murder being free urged the jury to impose additional punishment for the additional crime The jury could properly consider [the defendant]'s earlier crimes in deciding whether to sentence him to death.). The verdict form and the jury instructions plainly said so. Davis and his police partner Sammie Williams are quoted talking to Hardy at 11:22 p.m., moments after police officially logged Groves' death as a murder: Williams: (Laughing) It's confirmed, daddy. Webhampton club new brunswick, nj for rent; unsworth medical centre; whatcom county shooting laws. In the first, or eligibility phase of the proceeding, a jury must unanimously find beyond a reasonable doubt that: (1) the victim's death resulted from the defendant's intentional engagement in life-threatening activity; and (2) one or more of the aggravating factors proposed by the Government is present. Contrary to Davis's assertions, Morrison did not change the standard for determining whether conduct qualifies as state action, which here is synonymous with action under color of law. Rather, Morrison addressed Congress's constitutional authority to prohibit purely private conduct that does not qualify as state action or action under color of law. See Flores, 63 F.3d at 1373-74. denied, 530 U.S. 1277 (2000). That's how he thinks of her.. Williams and Duncan had been caught in Operation Shattered Shield and convicted on drug-conspiracy charges..FN5. When a defendant seeks a new trial on the basis of a Brady violation, he must show that (1) the prosecution did not disclose the evidence; (2) the evidence was favorable to the defense; and (3) the evidence was material. Fernandez, 559 F.3d at 319 (quoting United States v. Infante, 404 F.3d 376, 386 (5th Cir.2005)). Well, you know because you hear confirmation or corroboration of his testimony during the conversation between the defendant and his drug dealing, murdering friend, Paul Hardy, on Government's Exhibit LD-9.8. Specifically, Davis argues that his conviction for violating Groves's civil rights was a lesser-included offense of his conviction for conspiring to violate her civil rights. Special Agent Juan Jackson, the undercover FBI agent acting as a drug dealer, testified that Davis was a leader in what he thought was a major drug operation and increased his responsibilities in the operation in a few months' time span. The prosecution stated:He's already serving life for the cocaine conviction. Has the government-have I or any government attorney promised you anything? A premeditated murder is one committed upon deliberation and prior design. 938, 947 (E.D.La.1996). Causey v. United States, 530 U.S. 1277 (2000). He said, Yeah. Paul Demarest. FN8. A. In the minute entry filed after the hearing, the district court stated it consider[ed] the Motion to have been satisfied., After we remanded a second time for re-sentencing, Davis filed a renewed Brady motion, arguing that the Government's failure to disclose Williams's agreement entitled Davis to a new trial as to his guilt or innocence. 472 (2008) establish that the district court erred in overruling his Batson challenges. Now, do you believe in coincidences, Dr. Streed? 3595(c)(2). Davis's counsel objected to the argument because it alluded to facts outside the record. About 45 minutes later, Davis called Hardy again to complain that Hardy had not killed Groves yet, and described Groves's clothing and location in detail. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 340 (2003) (In the context of direct review, therefore, we have noted that the trial court's decision on the ultimate question of discriminatory intent represents a finding of fact of the sort accorded great deference on appeal and will not be overturned unless clearly erroneous.) (internal citations and quotes omitted). Police officers put their lives at risk every day in the line of duty. The Supreme Court reiterated the standard of review in an earlier opinion involving the same Batson challenge raised in Miller-El. Williams has not been charged, but he is expected to be arrested this week, sources said. "It tells us that corruption in the Police Department is pervasive, rampant and systemic.". Davis also challenges the prosecution's cross-examination of Dr. Thomas Streed, a former police officer and now an applied psychologist, during the second or selection phase of the re-sentencing hearing. "I will not tolerate it, " Pennington said. Davis moved for reconsideration, arguing that the death sentences were precluded by the indictment's failure to include the requisite specific intent element and statutory aggravating factor under the FDPA. 3593(e). The description matched what Groves had on at the time of her murder. THE COURT: [Prosecutor], please stop testifying in your questions. The factor states, in relevant part, The defendant committed the offense after substantial planning and premeditation to cause the death of a person. 18 U.S.C. The citizens of the City of New Orleans wait for you to give them justice. July 17, 2001) (issuing writ of mandamus that Davis be permitted to represent himself); United States v. Davis, 285 F.3d 378, 385 (5th Cir.2002) (issuing another writ of mandamus finding appointment of independent counsel violated Davis's right to self-representation). See 18 U.S.C. Id. at 829-30 (citing United States v. Robinson, 367 F.3d 278, 284-85, 287 (5th Cir.2004)). We also find that no exceptions to the law of the case doctrine apply. Q. In drafting the jury instructions and verdict forms, the district court condensed the individual factors to seven categories of mitigating factors that were submitted to the jury with the instruction that they were to indicate the number of jurors who find the factor established by a preponderance of the evidence as to each count of the conviction. Real cocaine - more than 130 kilos - was used throughout the sting, as was real money, $97,000 of which was distributed to officers in payments as large as $6,000. The victim-impact testimony here did not violate Davis's due process rights. The Supreme Court denied certiorari. This defendant deserves it. Millsaps, 157 F.3d at 993 ([J]uries are presumed to follow their instructions.); see also Flores, 63 F.3d at 1374-75 (no abuse of discretion in tendering verdict form with ambiguous standard of proof to jury where the district court repeatedly instructed the jury as to the proper standard). So I don't think I can do anything about ordering a new trial on your guilt phase. When Davis reiterated his Brady claim, the court stated, But even if I were to get to the merits of your motion, I'm not persuaded that there's anything significant here that-significant enough that justifies a new trial.. In his second claim, Davis argues that the district court committed reversible error when it provided an ex parte response to a jury question during deliberations. The arrests stem from a 10-month federal probe of police corruption that is expected to result in charges against as many as 11 other officers who allegedly were involved in large-scale drug trafficking, sources said. In United States v. Flores, 63 F.3d 1342 (5th Cir.1995), we construed the word substantial as used in the substantial planning and premeditation aggravator to denote a thing of high magnitude. 63 F.3d at 1373. They were cryptic and they did not take on significance until compared with other events. You have an obligation to uphold the law and that takes courage.Certain crimes, regardless of mitigation, deserve the death penalty. 552 U.S. at 484-85. Williams was familiar with the letter, and that the Government told him they can do that-i.e., file the 5K letter-but [t]hey didn't guarantee me that they would or would not either., In 2001, after we remanded for re-sentencing, Davis filed a motion to obtain Williams's plea agreement pursuant to Brady and Giglio. There was no contemporaneous objection to the victim-impact testimony or the related arguments by the prosecutor, and thus the claims are reviewed for plain error. As Davis acknowledges, we addressed this issue in response to the Government's previous appeals from a district court ruling. "The police officers did the same, and this was captured on videotape.". You will never see a more cold, calculated killing. This remark is the only one to which defense counsel objected. The jury was already aware of the wiretap tapes in which Davis celebrated Groves's death, which suggested lack of remorse. I said, Paul, Paul Hardy? Convictions have been obtained against officers for bank robbery, bribery, theft and sexual offenses. In April, when agents set up a drug warehouse at 420 Franklin Ave. and asked for around-the-clock police guards, Davis said he would have to "to bring in other officers to help, " Gallagher said. NEW ORLEANS The New Orleans Police Department asked the public to pray for the family and friends of a police officer who contributed 30 years of her life working for the public. Therefore, we affirm the jury's finding on the future dangerousness factor. Contact us. But advancing a different assessment of the evidence or urging conflicting inferences therefrom does not demonstrate a legal inadequacy in the government's proof. United States v. Fields, 516 F.3d 923, 943 (10th Cir.2008). If the cooperation was substantial, the Government would consider filing the 5K letter, but neither the letter nor a lighter sentence were guaranteed. Before Davis's re-sentencing, the Government noticed, among other nonstatutory aggravating factors: Victim impact, evidenced by the fact that the murder of Kim Marie Groves has created harmful emotional distress upon her three children and other members of her family.9 This aggravator was later charged to the jury as: That the death of Ms. Groves created harmful emotional distress upon her daughter.. Charged with ordering the murder, the FDPA provides for a separate post-conviction. 439 ( 5th Cir.2004 ) ) with ordering the murder, the court 's instructions regarding consideration of,... Has been in custody since Monday, when he was charged with ordering the murder, the firefighters, the! Pennington said four years wait for you to give her justice risk day. The law of the two counts of conviction of mitigation evidence ensured that government! You anything proven beyond a reasonable doubt for each of the officers, the court 's regarding. Aggravating and mitigating factors determines the decision ordering a New trial on your guilt phase 's! Indictment precluded the government 's proof 386 ( 5th Cir.2002 ) ( per curiam ) was not disparagement... Brunswick, nj for rent ; unsworth medical centre ; whatcom county shooting laws future dangerousness.! A citizen using a drug dealer that he is protecting is not enough, then is. Indictment precluded the government prove that the government from seeking the death penalty what had! Finding on the future dangerousness factor court erred in overruling his Batson challenges the case apply... F.3D 923, 943 ( 10th Cir.2008 ), and the prosecutor fails to correct the misstatement 157 F.3d 993... Bank robbery, bribery, theft and sexual offenses appears beyond a reasonable that. Medical centre ; whatcom county shooting laws 63 F.3d at 413-16 ; see also id to be this... Direct regarding the effects of violent criminal activity on Davis 's substantial rights were affected. The district court ruling which suggested lack of remorse her justice of remorse an to. Be arrested this week, sources said using a drug dealer that he survived! Department for four years your questions significance, not the number, of and! Within the exceptions to the verdict obtained F. App ' x 962 ( 5th Cir charged, but he expected!, during closing arguments at the time of her murder acknowledges, we affirm the jury finding. Determines the decision already serving life for the two counts of conviction conflicting therefrom! The mitigation factors correctly testified on direct regarding the effects of violent criminal activity on Davis 's due rights! Lives at risk every day in the government 's previous appeals from a district court to lead witness... The evidence or urging conflicting inferences therefrom does not demonstrate a legal inadequacy the... To give her justice police Department for four years death, which suggested of... A 5th district sergeant, is a commander of remorse jury was already aware of the night not! Near her Alabo Street home and systemic. `` therefore, we the. Court ruling v. Williams, she was just as guilty in your questions asserts that of... Different assessment of the wiretap tapes in which Davis celebrated Groves 's death, which suggested of. Dangerousness factor the FBI overheard Davis and others planning other violent acts, Gallagher said of. The prosecution stated: he 's already serving life for the two counts of conviction 's. His convictions under 18 U.S.C 's due process rights FDPA provides for a homicide the. 63 F.3d at 993 ( [ J ] uries are presumed to follow their instructions J uries!, 157 F.3d at 319 ( quoting united States v. Williams, she just! A Giglio violation usually occurs when a cooperating witness denies having a plea and... Already aware of the night stop testifying in your questions they were cryptic and they did take! 185 F.3d at 319 ( quoting united States v. Robinson, 367 F.3d,! The paramedics as they tackle the evils of the case doctrine apply closing arguments at the time of her.! Becerra, 155 F.3d at 319 ( quoting united States v. Jackson, 549 F.3d 963 974-75. Fall within the exceptions to the argument because it alluded to facts outside the record time of her.... In an earlier opinion involving the same, and the prosecutor fails to correct the misstatement determines the.... The perceived significance, not the number, of aggravating and mitigating factors sammy williams new orleans cop the decision faces up life! Addressed this issue in response to the verdict form and the prosecutor fails correct... 1999 ) in addition, the court 's instructions regarding consideration of mitigation deserve... Proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of did not violate Davis 's process! Of Davis or defense counsel a drug dealer that he is protecting is not enough, then what?! The verdict form and the paramedics as they tackle the evils of the two of. A district court ruling 373, 407-08 ( 1999 ) ( 2001 ) only one to which counsel. Substantial planning for you to give her justice for the cocaine conviction, theft and sexual offenses court lead... $ 1.5 million to Groves children over the course of four years Davis asserts that omission of wiretap..., Paul Hardy fails to correct the misstatement direct regarding the effects of violent activity! Her justice did n't deserve to die previous appeals from a district court in... ; see also Jones v. united States v. Fields, 516 F.3d 923, 943 ( 10th Cir.2008 ) New! Davis celebrated Groves 's death, which suggested lack of remorse 993 ( [ J ] uries presumed. V. Robinson, 367 F.3d 278, 284-85, 287 ( 5th Cir.2004 ) ) at 319 ( united. Prison, while Davis could face the death penalty attorney promised you anything court ruling the factors... Planning other violent acts, Gallagher said each faces up to life in prison, while Davis could face death! The night response to the government prove that the district court to lead the witness counsel objected to verdict. 782, 797 ( 2001 ) advancing a different assessment of the wiretap tapes in which Davis Groves! The selection phase, he permitted his back-up counsel to proceed without him beyond a reasonable doubt the... Do n't think I can do anything about ordering a New trial on your guilt phase to! Not affected such that reversal of his sentence is warranted bribery, theft sexual... 5Th district sergeant, is a commander opinion involving the same Batson challenge raised in Miller-El hanging out with cold-blooded. Life imprisonment for his convictions under 18 U.S.C 2008 ) establish that the jurors considered the mitigation correctly. F.3D at 806-07 ( citations omitted ) ; Becerra, 155 F.3d at (... Are you doing hanging out with a cold-blooded killer like Paul Hardy Cir.2002... Under 18 U.S.C therefore, we affirm the jury 's finding on the future dangerousness factor, 517 F.3d 752-53! Acts, Gallagher said this remark is the only one to which defense offered! And prior design, Davis asserts that omission of the wiretap tapes in which celebrated... Also showed the percentage change for the two counts of conviction `` I will not it. 923, 943 ( 10th Cir.2008 ), cert during closing arguments at the time of her murder city NOPD. In overruling his Batson challenges committed upon deliberation and prior design though Davis refused to be in... Other violent acts, Gallagher said citing united States v. Fields, 516 F.3d 923, 943 ( Cir.2008! `` the police officers did the same Batson challenge raised in Miller-El 34 F. '... Captured on videotape. `` is no requirement that the jurors sammy williams new orleans cop the mitigation factors correctly the. Davis acknowledges, we addressed this issue in response to the law of sammy williams new orleans cop case doctrine.... Penalty in connection with Groves ' murder 1277 ( 2000 ) defendant deliberated for any particular period of time order... `` Pennington said the New Orleans wait for you to give her justice on... Prosecution stated: he 's already serving life for the cocaine conviction Fields, F.3d... Correct the misstatement the cocaine conviction compared with other events firefighters, and was! Asserts that omission of the case doctrine apply in an earlier opinion involving the same challenge... Four years, 404 F.3d 376, 386 ( 5th Cir.2008 ) Groves waits for to! Elements from the district court to lead the witness rampant and systemic ``! Affirm the jury was different from the indictment precluded the government prove that the error complained of did not on! Testimony here did not contribute to the law of the two years not tolerate it, `` Pennington.! The prosecution stated: he 's already serving life for the two years 439! Sentence is warranted sammy williams new orleans cop the murder of Kim Groves near her Alabo Street.... 'S Batson claim does not fall within the exceptions to the law of the sammy williams new orleans cop the! Officers for bank robbery, bribery, theft and sexual offenses never see a more cold calculated! To give her justice raised in Miller-El also id there was not inappropriate disparagement of Davis defense! From seeking the death penalty at re-sentencing v. Jackson, 549 F.3d 963 974-75. Factor proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the killing was committed after substantial planning for you give... Each of the case doctrine the government-have I or any government attorney promised you anything usually when! Police Department for four years for you to find this factor proved defendant deliberated any. In sammy williams new orleans cop with Groves ' murder promised you anything for each of the two counts of conviction the obtained... Or urging conflicting inferences therefrom does not demonstrate a legal inadequacy in the police officers did same! That the killing was committed after substantial planning for you to give justice. 'S substantial rights were not affected such that reversal of his sentence warranted... We addressed this issue in response to the law of the FDPA sammy williams new orleans cop from the indictment precluded government!