Title: Zirkle v. Commonwealth

State: virginia

Issuer: Virginia Supreme Court

Document:

Present:  All the Justices 
 
DANIEL LEE ZIRKLE 
OPINION BY JUSTICE LEROY R. HASSELL, SR. 
v.  Record Nos. 010227 & 010228 
November 2, 2001 
 
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 
 
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ROCKINGHAM COUNTY 
Porter R. Graves, Jr., Judge 
 
 
As required by Code § 17.1-313, we review the sentence of 
death imposed upon Daniel Lee Zirkle. 
I. 
 
A grand jury in Rockingham County issued three 
indictments against Daniel Lee Zirkle charging him with the 
following offenses:  the capital murder of Jessica Shifflett 
"as part of the same act or transaction in which he 
unlawfully, feloniously, willfully, deliberately and with 
premeditation killed Christina Zirkle" in violation of Code 
§ 18.2-31(7)*; the capital murder of Jessica Shifflett "within 
the three year period in which he unlawfully, feloniously, 
willfully and deliberately with premeditation killed Christina 
Zirkle" in violation of Code § 18.2-31(8); and breaking and 
entering in the daytime of a dwelling house with the intent to 
commit murder while armed with a deadly weapon in violation of 
Code § 18.2-90. 
                     
* Zirkle was convicted of the capital murder of Christina  
Zirkle and sentenced to death.  See Zirkle v. Commonwealth, 
262 Va. 320, 551 S.E.2d 601 (2001). 
 
On August 16, 2000, Zirkle's counsel informed the circuit 
court that Zirkle desired to enter pleas of guilty to the 
indictments and to request that the court impose upon him a 
sentence of death.  Zirkle's counsel told the circuit court 
that they had discussed the pleas with Zirkle "in great 
length" and that they disagreed with him, but that he desired 
to enter the guilty pleas over their objections.  Zirkle 
further advised his counsel that he would not permit them to 
participate in the penalty phase of the proceedings by 
presenting mitigating evidence. 
 
The circuit court examined Zirkle extensively regarding 
counsel's representations to the court, which Zirkle 
confirmed.  Zirkle was arraigned, and he entered pleas of 
guilty to the indictments.  The circuit court considered a 
proffer of the evidence that the Commonwealth would have 
adduced during the guilt phase of the trial of the capital 
murder charges and the non-capital charge.  Zirkle agreed with 
the Commonwealth's proffer. 
 
The circuit court conducted an inquiry incident to the 
tendered pleas and concluded that Zirkle was mentally 
competent and fully capable of understanding the proceedings.  
The court also found that Zirkle fully understood the nature 
and effect of his guilty pleas and the possible penalties that 
could be imposed upon him.  The circuit court found that 
 
2
Zirkle's pleas were made freely, intelligently, and 
voluntarily.  The circuit court accepted Zirkle's pleas and 
found him guilty of capital murder as charged in the 
indictments and guilty of breaking and entering with the 
intent to commit murder while armed with a deadly weapon.  
Zirkle received a life sentence for his conviction of breaking 
and entering with the intent to commit murder while armed with 
a deadly weapon, and even though he filed a notice of appeal 
from that conviction, he does not challenge that conviction or 
sentence on appeal. 
 
Pursuant to Code § 19.2-264.4, the circuit court 
proceeded with the penalty phase of the capital murder trial.  
Zirkle instructed his counsel not to present mitigation 
evidence.  The court directed Zirkle's counsel to prepare to 
present mitigation evidence in the penalty phase of the 
proceeding in the event that Zirkle subsequently changed his 
mind.  Zirkle again instructed his counsel to refrain from 
presenting evidence in the penalty phase of the proceeding.  
The circuit court, on numerous occasions, asked Zirkle whether 
he desired to present evidence during the penalty phase of the 
proceeding, and on each occasion, Zirkle responded in the 
negative.   
 
The Commonwealth presented its evidence.  After 
considering the evidence and a report prepared by the 
 
3
probation officer pursuant to Code § 19.2-299, the circuit 
court found that the Commonwealth had proven beyond a 
reasonable doubt that there is a probability based upon the 
evidence of prior history of the defendant and the 
circumstances surrounding the offense that Zirkle would commit 
criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing 
serious threat to society, and that his conduct in committing 
the offense was outrageously and wantonly vile, horrible and 
inhuman, in that it involved torture, depravity of mind or 
aggravated battery to the victim, Jessica Shifflett.  The 
circuit court entered a final judgment fixing Zirkle's 
punishment at death. 
 
Zirkle apparently directed his counsel not to appeal the 
judgment of the circuit court.  His counsel filed "a motion 
for direction and guidance" in the clerk's office of this 
Court.  We entered an order that required the circuit court to 
conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether Zirkle's 
decision not to pursue an appeal was voluntary and 
intelligent.  We also directed the circuit court to obtain 
Zirkle's written waiver under oath and file it with the 
transcribed record of the hearing in the event the court 
determined that Zirkle's decision was voluntary and 
intelligent.  After conducting a hearing, the circuit court 
concluded that Zirkle's "directions to his [c]ounsel not to 
 
4
participate in the appeal process and his decision not to 
participate in the appeal process were intelligently, 
voluntarily, and knowingly made and that [Zirkle] is mentally 
competent to make the decision to waive his appeal rights."  
The circuit court obtained an executed written waiver of 
Zirkle's right of appeal, signed by Zirkle in open court and 
under oath. 
 
Even though Zirkle waived his right of appeal and 
directed his counsel not to participate in any appeals on his 
behalf, this Court must review the imposition of the sentence 
of death.  We ordered that Zirkle's counsel file a brief and 
present oral argument to this Court upon the matters contained 
in Code § 17.1-313, which states in relevant part: 
 
"A.  A sentence of death, upon the judgment 
thereon becoming final in the circuit court, shall 
be reviewed on the record by the Supreme Court. 
 
. . . . 
 
 
"C.  [T]he Court shall consider and determine: 
 
 
"1.  Whether the sentence of death was 
imposed under the influence of passion, 
prejudice or any other arbitrary factor; and 
 
 
"2.  Whether the sentence of death is 
excessive or disproportionate to the penalty 
imposed in similar cases, considering both the 
crime and the defendant." 
 
Thus, we review Zirkle's sentence of death to determine 
whether it was imposed under the influence of any arbitrary 
 
5
factor and whether his sentence of death is excessive or 
disproportionate. 
II. 
A. 
The Proffered Evidence 
 
Zirkle and Barbara J. Shifflett, who were not married, 
shared a residence together.  In April 1999, the Juvenile and 
Domestic Relations District Court of Harrisonburg and 
Rockingham Counties issued a protective order that directed 
Zirkle to stay away from the residence he had shared with 
Barbara Shifflett.  Zirkle was convicted of violating that 
order in May 1999 and was incarcerated. 
 
On August 2, 1999, Barbara Shifflett left her home and 
went to her place of employment.  Her daughters, Jessica 
Shifflett and Christina Zirkle, remained at the home.  
Christina Zirkle was the natural child of the defendant.  
Barbara Shifflett had instructed Jessica, who was 14 years 
old, to take care of Christina, who was four years old.  
Barbara Shifflett called her home several times that day to 
"check on" the children. 
 
In the afternoon of August 2, 1999, Zirkle, who had been 
released from incarceration, placed a telephone call to 
Barbara Shifflett and stated, "[l]ive in hell, bitch," and he 
hung up the telephone.  Barbara Shifflett became concerned, 
 
6
and she went to a magistrate who issued an arrest warrant 
against Zirkle for violation of the protective order.  
Subsequently, Barbara Shifflett received a telephone call from 
the defendant's mother, JoAnn Zirkle, who informed Shifflett 
that the defendant had taken Christina from Barbara 
Shifflett's home. 
 
Barbara Shifflett immediately left her place of 
employment and began to drive her automobile to her home.  
JoAnn Zirkle placed a "911 call" to emergency response 
personnel because she was concerned that the defendant had 
taken Christina Zirkle to an area in Page County called Story 
Book Trail. 
 
When Barbara Shifflett arrived at her home, she entered 
the residence and began "crying out" for her daughters.  She 
ran though the home screaming for her daughters, but she was 
unable to find them.  Eventually, she found Jessica lying on 
the floor in a bedroom.  Barbara Shifflett was unable to 
discern whether Jessica was "alive or dead."  She observed 
what she thought was red paint on Jessica's arm, but she later 
learned that the liquid was actually Jessica's blood.  Barbara 
Shifflett attempted to revive Jessica, but she was unable to 
do so.  Barbara Shifflett ran out of her residence "yelling 
for help." 
 
7
 
Officers from the Rockingham County Sheriff's Office 
arrived at Barbara Shifflett's residence to inform her that 
her other child, Christina, had been killed.  Barbara 
Shifflett asked the officers to help Jessica, who had been 
stabbed in the throat.  The officers tried but were unable to 
revive Jessica. 
 
Christina's body had been found by a Page County sheriff 
investigator who had been dispatched to the Story Book Trail.  
Christina had sustained a large neck wound, and her body was 
lying on Zirkle's chest.  A knife was lying near Zirkle's 
extended arm.  The investigator kicked the knife away from 
Zirkle's hand because the officer was concerned with his 
safety. 
 
Zirkle was subsequently transported to a hospital where 
he told a psychiatric medical resident that he killed 
Christina and Jessica.  Zirkle also admitted "his role" in the 
murders to two detectives who interviewed him. 
B. 
Evidence Adduced During the Penalty Phase 
 
The Commonwealth adduced the following evidence during 
the penalty phase of the proceedings.  Barbara Shifflett 
testified that Zirkle had abused her physically and mentally.  
For example, in December 1998, Zirkle shoved her against a 
 
8
refrigerator.  In January 1999, Zirkle pushed her against a 
cabinet, and she fell and cut her elbow. 
 
In the spring of 1999, Zirkle became angry because 
Christina and Jessica had spent the night with their cousins.  
Zirkle became enraged and pushed Barbara Shifflett "into [a] 
sofa."  When Shifflett tried to place a telephone call for 
help, Zirkle pushed her against a fish tank.  During that 
incident, Shifflett was able to place a telephone call to 
police officers who responded to the residence.  She left the 
residence to spend the night with her sister, Peggy Shifflett.  
Zirkle repeatedly placed telephone calls to Peggy Shifflett's 
house, and he told Barbara Shifflett that he "wanted [her] and 
the girls home, f'n girls home."  When Barbara Shifflett 
responded that she did not intend to return to the home, 
Zirkle stated, "you want a war . . . you'll have a war you f'n 
bitch, you'll pay."  Even though a protective order had been 
entered prohibiting Zirkle from entering the residence he 
shared with Barbara Shifflett, when she returned to her home 
the following day, the defendant had entered the home, hidden 
in the shower, and attacked her. 
 
Subsequently, Barbara Shifflett told the defendant during 
a telephone conversation that they should terminate their 
relationship.  Zirkle responded that she would "pay for 
breaking up his family." 
 
9
 
Lieutenant Daniel Comer, who is employed by the 
Rockingham County Sheriff's Department, testified that Zirkle 
admitted he had called Barbara Shifflett between the time he 
killed Jessica and the time he killed Christina and told 
Barbara Shifflett, "[l]ive in hell, bitch, live in hell." 
 
Ricky L. Dean was in jail with Zirkle before Zirkle 
killed Jessica and Christina in August 1999.  Zirkle had a 
conversation with Dean.  Zirkle told Dean that when Zirkle 
"got out he was going to kill all three of them, if he 
couldn't have them nobody else would." 
 
Frances Patricia Field, a forensic pathologist, performed 
an autopsy on the body of Christina Zirkle.  She testified 
that when she examined Christina's body, she noticed bruised 
areas on the back of Christina's head, at the base of her 
neck, and on her back.  The bruising on the back would have 
been caused by blunt force injuries.  Christina sustained an 
injury to her left shoulder which was consistent with a 
struggle. 
 
Christina's body had a large wound on the front of the 
neck and chest.  According to Dr. Field, the wound was "both a 
combined stab wound and incised wound.  Also there's some 
irregularity of the edges of the wound which indicate some 
turning of the sharp instrument which caused the wound."  Dr. 
Field also testified that the wound contained jagged areas 
 
10
which could be consistent with either "the turning of [a] 
blade" or with movement by the child.  She stated:  "The wound 
cut across a large surface of skin and soft tissue at the 
front of the neck and the stab wound went into the body to a 
depth of about two and three-quarter inches going between two 
vertebrae or backbones in the neck region and cut the spinal 
cord in half which is a fatal wound."  Dr. Field concluded 
that this injury was caused by a knife.  Dr. Field testified 
that "[s]evering the spinal cord can produce a relatively fast 
death although this is lower on the cord than one that would 
be immediately fatal.  But the severance of the cord at that 
level plus the bleeding from the wound would result in a death 
in a matter of a few minutes." 
 
Dr. William Massello, an assistant chief pathologist for 
Western Virginia, performed an autopsy on the body of Jessica 
Shifflett.  Jessica suffered a pattern of injuries to her neck 
area which were caused before her death.  She had five stab 
wounds to her neck.  Dr. Massello stated:  "[T]wo stab wounds 
actually went into the muscles and very deeply into the neck 
going right across the neck from right to left and they 
injured a major artery, a major vein on the left side and a 
major vein on the right side.  And the result was bleeding, 
very substantial external bleeding from these wounds and 
subsequent rapid death.  [One] wound . . . did not go in as 
 
11
deeply.  This [wound] went more directly into the neck only to 
a depth of about a half an inch and did not strike any vital 
structures and was not lethal per se . . . [T]he thyroid gland 
which is a gland that regulates your metabolism was injured 
and there was bleeding from there but was not to any degree as 
injurious or as rapidly lethal as the two wounds to the left 
side of the neck which cut the major arteries and veins in 
there."  Jessica also suffered bruises to her skull and had 
defensive wounds on her fingers and hands. 
 
Ronald J. Jackson, an inmate who was incarcerated with 
Zirkle after he had been arrested for the murders of Jessica 
and Christina, gave the following testimony.  "An officer 
. . . let Mr. Zirkle know that he was going to be a patron of 
the car wash that was going to provide monies for the 
headstones of the two victims.  Mr. Zirkle, when the officer 
had acknowledged that he was going to be a patron, Mr. Zirkle 
said, 'Is Barbara going to be there?  Tell that bitch I said 
checkmate,' and [he] ran his finger across his throat, or his 
thumb across his throat."  Zirkle also told Jackson in a later 
conversation:  "Well, I wish I could have killed Ms. Shifflett 
. . . It would have been all worth it." 
 
In 1988, Zirkle was convicted of armed robbery.  Nancy 
Berry, the victim of the robbery, testified that Zirkle 
entered a store where she was employed as a cashier.  He 
 
12
displayed a butcher knife, Berry gave him money from a cash 
register, and Zirkle left the store.  In 1999, Zirkle pled 
guilty to possession of marijuana and was convicted of that 
offense.  The Commonwealth presented evidence that Zirkle had 
also threatened and abused members of Barbara Shifflett's 
family. 
III.  Passion, Prejudice, and Proportionality 
A. 
 
Counsel for Zirkle state that "every death case contains 
an element of passion," but they "cannot point to any evidence 
in the record that would indicate that the [c]ourt was 
influenced by passion, prejudice or any other arbitrary 
factor.  Counsel . . . ask[] the [c]ourt to review the 
proceedings contained in the Appendix and especially the 
presentence report in considering this issue." 
 
We have reviewed the record, and we find no evidence that 
Zirkle's sentence of death was imposed under the influence of 
passion, prejudice, or any other arbitrary factor.  We also 
observe that the circuit court repeatedly informed Zirkle that 
he was entitled to present evidence in mitigation, but Zirkle 
refused to permit his attorneys to present such evidence. 
B. 
 
The test of proportionality that we apply is whether 
"juries in this jurisdiction generally approve the supreme 
 
13
penalty for comparable or similar crimes."  Smith v. 
Commonwealth, 239 Va. 243, 271, 389 S.E.2d 871, 886 (quoting 
Stamper v. Commonwealth, 220 Va. 260, 284, 257 S.E.2d 808, 824 
(1979), cert. denied, 445 U.S. 972 (1980)), cert. denied, 498 
U.S. 881 (1990). 
 
Zirkle's counsel state that since they were prevented 
"from presenting any evidence in mitigation, [they] cannot 
point to any evidence in the record that would indicate that 
the sentence of death is excessive or disproportionate to the 
penalty imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime 
and the defendant.  Counsel for Mr. Zirkle ask[] the Court to 
carefully consider the previous cases reviewed by this Court 
in determining whether the sentence imposed is excessive or 
disproportionate to the penalty imposed in similar cases, 
considering both the crime and the defendant." 
 
We have examined the records in all capital murder cases 
reviewed by this Court since the adoption of Code § 17.1-313 
and its predecessor, Code § 17-110.1.  Applying the test of 
proportionality, we hold that the sentence of death imposed 
upon Zirkle is neither excessive nor disproportionate to the 
penalties imposed in similar cases, considering both the crime 
and the defendant.  See Zirkle v. Commonwealth, 262 Va. 320, 
551 S.E.2d 601 (2001); Walker v. Commonwealth, 258 Va. 54, 515 
S.E.2d 565 (1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1125 (2000); 
 
14
Bramblett v. Commonwealth, 257 Va. 263, 513 S.E.2d 400, cert. 
denied, 528 U.S. 952 (1999); Beck v. Commonwealth, 253 Va. 
373, 484 S.E.2d 898, cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1018 (1997); 
Clagett v. Commonwealth, 252 Va. 79, 472 S.E.2d 263 (1996), 
cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1122 (1997); Goins v. Commonwealth, 251 
Va. 442, 470 S.E.2d 114, cert. denied, 519 U.S. 887 (1996); 
Stewart v. Commonwealth, 245 Va. 222, 427 S.E.2d 394, cert. 
denied, 510 U.S. 848 (1993); George v. Commonwealth, 242 Va. 
264, 411 S.E.2d 12 (1991), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 973 (1992). 
IV. 
 
Having reviewed the sentence of death pursuant to Code 
§ 17.1-313, we decline to commute the sentence to imprisonment 
for life.  Accordingly, we will affirm the judgment of the 
circuit court. 
Affirmed. 
 
 
15