Title: Davis v. State

State: arkansas

Issuer: Arkansas Supreme Court

Document:

Woodrow DAVIS III v. STATE of Arkansas

CR 97-562                                          ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
               Opinion delivered November 20, 1997


1.   Evidence -- relevant evidence -- when excludable. -- Relevant
     evidence may be excluded only if its probative value is
     substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice,
     confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, or by
     considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless
     presentation of cumulative evidence.

2.   Evidence -- allowing recorded mention of pistol into evidence
     not error -- State not limited in amount of proof introduced
     to prove its case. -- Appellant's concern that his mention of
     a .357 pistol on the taped conversation added nothing new to
     the State's case and so should not have been allowed into
     evidence at trial was without merit; the State was not limited
     in the amount of proof it could introduce to prove its case.

3.   Evidence -- disputed passages highly relevant -- any
     prejudicial effect outweighed by probative value -- trial
     court affirmed. -- Where removing the five disputed passages
     would have caused confusion regarding the meaning of the
     remaining portions of appellant's recorded conversation that
     were introduced without objection; appellant's recorded
     conversation corroborated the confession he made a day later;
     and those segments of the recording considered along with
     appellant's confession showed appellant's part in the murder
     and that appellant's recorded statements related to his past
     participation in that murder, the trial court did not abuse
     its discretion in rejecting appellant's argument that the
     probative value of the State's evidence was outweighed by
     danger of unfair prejudice or needless cumulative evidence; to
     the contrary, the jury likely would have been confused or
     misled if the five segments objected to had been excluded from
     evidence.


     Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court; John W. Langston, Judge;
affirmed.
     William R. Simpson, Jr., Public Defender, by:  Deborah R.
Sallings, for appellant.
     Winston Bryant, Att'y Gen., by:  Gil Dudley, Asst. Att'y Gen.,
for appellee.

     Tom Glaze, Justice.
     Appellant Woodrow Davis, III, was convicted of capital murder
for the shooting death of Billy Sanders on January 31, 1995. 
Although the State sought the death penalty, Davis was sentenced to
life imprisonment without parole.  
     At trial the State introduced a taped conversation made on
April 17, 1995, between Davis and an acquaintance, Bobby Tygart. 
Tygart had suspected Davis' involvement in Sanders' death and had
offered to aid law enforcement officers in the investigation of the
murder.  Unbeknownst to Davis, Tygart was wired when Tygart
initiated conversation and successfully obtained Davis' statements
implicating himself in Sanders' murder.  Also, as a part of the
State' case-in-chief, the State introduced into evidence Davis'
confession which officers obtained on April 18, 1995.  
     Davis' only point for reversal on appeal is that the trial
court erred in refusing to exclude from evidence five segments from
Davis' and Tygart's recorded conversation.  Davis' argument is
meritless.
     In addressing Davis' point, we are met with his general
contention that the five segments he sought to exclude at trial had
little or no probative value and whatever value they might have had
was outweighed by their unfair and undue prejudice.  See Ark. R.
Evid. 403 (1997).  Davis also claims the content of the disputed
segments had no independent relevance to the State's case and
tended only to show him as a bad person.  See Ark. R. Evid. 404
(1997). 
     The only meaningful way to examine and understand Davis'
argument is to abstract all of his statements made during his
conversation with Tygart, but in doing so, we sequentially number
and italicize the five passages to which Davis objects: 
          What are you doing?  Let's go.  Come here, boy. 
     Where's your old lady at?  Fayetteville?  What for?  Oh
     yeah --. (Tygart's aunt is in the hospital in
     Jacksonville; the aunt's car is messed up, and explains
     to Davis this is why he got away without his wife.)  Oh
     yeah.  

          You don't got no dope?  No, not, I did some crack. 
     I used a big old rock of crack.  Cocaine.  Oh, let's go
     get a rock.  No (Davis doesn't have any money), I was
     going to get twenty from you.  I was gonna borrow twenty
     from you.  You!  On "E?" (Tygart's gas gauge)  Just out
     runnin' around?  He's left town (referring to a man named
     "Johnny").  Supposed to be headed to Wisconsin.

          (Tygart asks where he can get a gun.)  (1)  What
     for?  I don't man, what for?  To kill somebody.  If you
     kill somebody, book 'em and run.  Talk to old Jim.  He
     may have one.  (Jim) Milam.  Old Jim, he won't tell
     nobody.  Hasn't got as much power does it? (referring to
     the car)  How's that?  It ain't (the same part of the
     car).  Room and board up here at Cecil's house.  I'm
     gonna ask him about y'all's shit.  And I'll see if I can
     borrow twenty dollars from him.  No (Cecil doesn't have
     a gun).  Jim may have one.  He had one that I used a time
     or two but, he was supposed to got rid of it.  We can
     check' em.  

          (Davis next gives directions to Tygart)

          No.  I'd have to go by myself (to talk to Milam;
     Tygart then remarks he does not want to talk to Milam). 
     Why not?  What?  (Tygart responds he has a lot on his
     mind).  I do, too.  Got it from my old lady.  Jim will
     give me fifty dollars in the morning, but he can't get it
     until morning 'cause his old lady is there, and that's
     why I couldn't talk to him.  (Jim is) Robert's uncle or
     his nephew.  He's (Robert) out there somewhere -- staying
     --.  I ain't seen him -- Well, I seen him the other day. 
     I went over there and seen him.  

          (The next portion of the conversation discusses what
     Robert's Uncle is in jail for and more directions to
     Cecil's).

          (Tygart and Davis discuss Tygart's requirement of
     being in Jacksonville by 9:00, and directions once more.) 
     
          (2)  I'll pop a mother fucker in the head. 
     (Unintelligible) --  Bull shit walks.  Mother fucker pay
     me right.  Mother fucker pay me right, I'll pop the
     mother fucker for ya.  But, uh, you can.  Yeah. 
     (Inaudible) have to pay right, huh.  (Tygart states he
     doesn't know if he could shoot a person).  (3)  I can. 
     I can.  I can.  (Tygart asks if Davis would have bad
     dreams afterwards).  I hadn't.  I can't tell ya (who he
     shot).  I got fucked up, boy.  You know the mother
     fucker.  Who? (Has Tygart figured out?  Tygart says
     Bill.)  How do you figure?  I didn't say that.  You don't
     know that.  I'll go to the penitentiary for life on that. 
     Oh I figured (Unintelligible) that you looked at me
     (laughing) uh, yeah, Woody did (Unintelligible).  Hey,
     man, fuckin' planned on -- paying for a fuckin'
     (Unintelligible).  Somebody else got paid to do it and
     then couldn't.  And never got it done.  Never got it done
     and then I got in on the deal.  
     
          Uh, like I say, I got in on the deal, and it took me
     forever and ever, kept putting it off.  Then I -- 'Cause
     I was scopin' him.  Uh, I was sitting across the woods
     every morning and sitting across the road in the woods
     watching that mother fucker every morning in the mud,
     rain, cold.  Shoot, about four, five or six months before
     I ever finally got any -- Well, what it got down to, the
     boy that I -- we was doing it for said that --.  Peoples
     on him -- that peoples on him, and they said, you know,
     look, they on me.  It's either him or ya'll.  He said
     ya'll done know too much,  Said either get him, or we're
     gonna get ya'll.  No, not you.  Me and the guy I did it
     for.  

          Me and the guy that was with me that was supposed to
     do it, I just supposed to do all of the driving and shit. 
     Then when it come down, he didn't have the balls, so I
     had to do it.  Well, shit I got -- I didn't get rid of
     that -- I just planned my shit out and screwed around and
     got by with it.  There's a reward out now over it I
     heard.  Don't nobody know but me, the guy that was with
     me and the guy that had us do it, and you.  I ain't gonna
     say nothing about it again.  Fuckin' took forever. 
     Goddamn.       

          (Tygart then questions Davis about how he felt    
     afterwards.)   

          (4)  I's real hurt.  I had to go get some stuff.  I
     went and got me a gram, phew, the whole half.  Yeah (at
     one time).  I's pushing.  Pheewwww, boy I was going. 
     Shit.  Took me a while, I have -- I felt better when I
     got over it though.  It wasn't, wasn't like I thought it
     was gonna be.  I don't think about it.  When I think
     about how the pussy the mother fucker acted about it.  He
     was scared.  Mother fucker went through -- Yeah, damn
     near.  He had to of, 'cause you know, Bob told him, hey
     man, you better come off that shit if you want to live. 
     And he thought he's gonna live and give me all his shit,
     but he didn't live.  I knew what I had to do.  Mother
     fucker with a .357 in your side.

          No, he was supposed to have (some dope).  No.  He
     bought it.  He fuckin' bought an ounce a week or two
     ounces a week.  A kilo or something.  Fucking crystal or
     cocaine, and he pushed it.  He bought that a week.  He's
     got all that money stashed in his house.  Cause the guy
     was fuckin' his old lady, she come by and gave --.  Well,
     he don't no more, he's gone.  Bill got the dope, and he
     put it up to his pushers, mainly in Jacksonville, and
     then they went out, you know.  He, he always passes out
     two or three people --.  

          That if I didn't kill him, they were going to kill
     me for not killing him, 'cause I already knew too much. 
     Yeah. And they'd still kill me now if I say anything. 
     Don't nobody know nothing but me, him and him and -- the
     militia -- These mother fuckers are worse than the
     militia.  I ain't lying.  These mother fuckers are worse
     than the militia.  It's like the Mafia.
     
          (Tygart then explains some trouble he is in.)
     
          (5)  Boy, don't ever fucking say nothing about that
     shit, 'cause Goddamn, we'd both have to get killed.  I
     ain't lying.  I ain't lying.  What was really so fucked
     up about it was the mother fucker was such a pussy about
     it, 'cause you know, when you got a .357 in your side,
     you gonna suck his dick if you want -- if you want.  If
     you don't --.  It wasn't what there was supposed to be
     (the money on Sanders).  No, not all of it (was spent by
     Davis buying crack).  Crystal, bought the boys some toys
     and shit.
     Davis specifically objected to each numbered segment set out
above as follows:
     (1)  Any reference to "If you kill somebody, book'em and run"
was not probative of any issue involved, showed Davis was
nonchalant about killing a person and portrayed him as a bad
person.  
     (2)  When referring to "popping" a person for the right money,
the statement made no reference to a specific person and was merely
a general observation.
     (3)  In stating he could shoot somebody and it not bother him,
it was not probative, but was highly prejudicial.  
     (4)  His statement concerning the taking of drugs to make him
feel better after shooting [Billy] did not reflect Davis' state of
mind on the day of the incident [murder] and was irrelevant to any
issue at trial.
     (5)  His reference to using a .357 on Billy Sanders added no
new information, and the remainder of the statement portrayed Davis
as remorseless, which was not an issue in this case.
     In reviewing Davis' arguments in light of the full text of his
statements to Tygart, we conclude the five disputed passages were
highly relevant, and any prejudicial effect they had were clearly
outweighed by their probative value.  In fact, to remove those
segments challenged by Davis would only cause confusion regarding
the meaning of the remaining portions of his conversation with
Tygart that were introduced without objection.    
     The importance of the full text of Davis' April 17, 1995,
conversation with Tygart is best illustrated because his statements
to Tygart corroborate Davis' April 18, 1995, confession.  While
Davis does not challenge on appeal the trial court's ruling that
allowed his confession into evidence, Davis argued at trial that
his confession should have been suppressed because it was not
voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently given.  In his closing
argument to the jury, Davis' counsel argued that Davis' confession
resulted from some type of coercion.  Moreover, Davis also offered
testimony reflecting that Sanders' employer had received a prior
death threat on Sanders' life from a man other than Milam, Reeves
or Davis, who claimed Sanders had been seeing the man's wife.
     Davis' confession very clearly related how he, Robert Reeves,
and Reeves' uncle, Jim Milam, killed Sanders.  Milam was the one
who initiated the plan by contacting Reeves.  Milam gave Reeves a
30-30 rifle, but Reeves did not do the "job."  Milam then offered
money to Reeves and Davis if they would kill Sanders.  Davis and
Reeves made several morning trips to woods located near Sanders'
house, but Reeves still would not shoot Sanders.  Davis said that,
after Reeves and Davis failed to kill Sanders, Milam threatened
them that "it was either Bill (Sanders) or us."
     Davis' confession detailed the day of Sanders' murder, setting
out how each party participated.  Milam furnished a .357 pistol to
Davis and Reeves; afterwards Davis and Reeves found Sanders,
driving his truck into his employer's car lot on the morning of
January 31, 1995.  Reeves and Davis got into Sanders' truck and
proceeded to drive to a landfill in Pulaski County.  Milam drove
his vehicle to the landfill to join them, and after Reeves, Davis,
and Sanders arrived, Milam shot Sanders in the head while Sanders
was still in his truck.  Reeves then placed Sanders' truck in gear
so it would roll off and submerge into a water hole.  Davis and
Reeves had taken Sanders' ring and $300.00 in cash.  Davis said the
cash was split equally between him, Reeves and Milam, but Davis'
wife's stepfather later pawned the ring. 
     In sum, Davis argues the five disputed segments prejudicially
placed before the jury evidence and general observations that had
no relevance to any issue at trial.  Those segments considered
along with Davis' confession show Davis' part in Sanders' murder
and that Davis' statements to Tygart related to his past
participation in that murder.  As far as Davis' expressed concern
that his mention of a .357 pistol to Tygart added nothing new to
the State's case, the State was not limited in the amount of proof
it could introduce to prove its case.  Instead, the rule is that
relevant evidence may be excluded only if its probative value is
substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice,
confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, or by considerations
of undue delay, waste of time or needless presentation of
cumulative evidence.  Ark. R. Evid. 403.  Here, considering the
record before us, we are unable to say the trial court abused its
discretion in rejecting Davis' argument that the probative value of
the State's evidence was outweighed by danger of unfair prejudice
or needless cumulative evidence.  Again, to the contrary, we
believe the jury likely would have been confused or misled if the
five segments objected to had been excluded from evidence.
     Pursuant to Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-3(h), the record has been
examined in its entirety, and no other rulings adverse to Mr. Davis
involving prejudicial error were found.  We affirm.