Opinion ID: 1058506
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Victim's Identity

Text: The defendant contends the state engaged in prosecutorial misconduct in seeking to suggest that he intended to obliterate the victim's identity despite the lack of supporting evidence and the trial court's instructions not to do so. During the guilt phase of the trial, the state sought to introduce numerous photographs into evidence based upon its theory that the defendant intended that the victim's identity be obliterated. The trial court refused to admit the photographs based upon this theory. However, Sergeant Alvin Peppers testified that upon arriving at the scene, he was unable to identify any of the victim's features because the face of the body was so mutilated. Upon objection by defense counsel, the trial court disallowed the introduction of a photograph depicting the victim's face due to its prejudicial effect but permitted Sergeant Peppers to testify regarding his observations while at the scene. Prior to Dr. Deering's testimony, the trial court held a jury-out hearing to discuss photographs which would be introduced during the doctor's testimony. The trial court again prohibited the state from introducing photographs based upon this theory because no one had testified that the defendant had instructed the gang members to erase the victim's identity. However, the trial court further stated that the prosecutor could argue an inference based upon the evidence admitted. We are unable to conclude the state engaged in prosecutorial misconduct. The trial court refused to admit numerous photographs based upon this theory. Furthermore, the prosecutor could properly argue an inference based upon Sergeant Peppers' testimony regarding the appearance of the victim at the scene and Dr. Deering's testimony regarding the location and effect of the various gunshot wounds. This issue is without merit.