Opinion ID: 1256193
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Prejudice in this Case

Text: {140} In my view, and contrary to the majority opinion, the victim impact evidence in this case was excessive and warrants a new sentencing hearing even under the Payne standard. Portions of the victim impact testimony, which, in my opinion, far exceeded the limited testimony tolerable under Payne, follow: {141} A friend of the Phillips family, Laci Minor, described the family's efforts to find the missing girl. She related that Darlene Phillips called her the evening that her daughter disappeared, and that, after a sleepless night, she helped Ms. Phillips talk to the police the next day. She described putting up posters as far away as Flagstaff, Prescott, Holbrook, and Phoenix. The prosecutor asked her: Q: Okay, and how were thosethose six weeks of waiting? A: They were horrible. Weit was just horrible not knowing if she was okay or where she was. Every time the phone rang, we jumped. Wewe hoped that she would call or that somebody would call. Darlene tried to follow every lead that she possibly could. Sheshe talked to people every day. If she had to call them, if she had to go out on the street and would walk around and just talk to people, and carry a picture around and say, Have you seen this girl? At one point her and Billy went to Colorado and talked to a psychic. Wewewe lived every day. We got up every day and we went to work. We slept. But it wasn't a life, for six weeks. {142} The State ended by eliciting, in considerable detail, Darlene Phillip's reaction to the news of her daughter's death. Ms. Minor received an emergency phone call at work, telling her to meet the Sheriff at the Phillips' house in 15 minutes. Deputy Cheverie told her, Now, you have to go in and tell Darlene. Q: You were standing with [Deputy] Jim Cheverie outside the house? A: Yes, sir. And I started walking to the house, and I got about halfway there and I just stopped and II said, I can't. I'mcannot go in and tell her that her daughter is dead. I cannot do that. So he said he would do it. We went into the house. Darlene had an appointment with Mr. Cheverie at the time, so she didn't think it was strange that he was there, and she thought that I was there for support because shebecause she was going to talk to him and I could have my input. So it wasn't strange to her that we showed up. We walked in, and she greeted usher and Bill greeted us, andand we are smiling andand instantly she kind of looked at me, and she said What? What is wrong? And so Mr. Cheverie told her that they had found Sandra's body. Q: How did Darlene react? A: Probably like any mother would react whenever somebody tells them that their daughter's body has been found. She Q: What did she do to Deputy Cheverie? A: She started hitting him in the chest, and she started asking him why and who and then she went outside. Darlene ran outside. Q: Did you follow her? A: Yes, sir, I did. My sister stayed in the house with Bill, and Mr. Cheverie and I went outside with Darlene. And she wasshe was running around the driveway, and she was crying. And I would try toI would try to hug her and touch her, and she would tell me no. And she was yelling and screaming, and the neighbors started coming out of their houses. And I finally got her to go back inside. And she went into the house and she picked up the cordless phone, and handed it to me. And she said, Now, you have to call Steven [Sandra Phillip's brother] and tell him that his sister is dead. So I took the phone outside and I called Steve, and I'm sure that he knew something was wrong instantly when he picked up the phone, because I said, Steve, this is Laci Minor. And he said, What's wrong? And I said, I think you'd better get a plane ticket and get here because Sandy's been found and she's dead. And we need you. And I hung up the phone with him and I just startedI called Darlene's best friend, Carol Williams, and I asked her to please come as soon as she could because we needed her. I called my parents. I called as many people as I could think of just so that they could help me take care of Darlene and Bill. And then Iwe started calling the relatives in Phoenix, and we startedI started making travel arrangements so we could get everybody here. And my sister and I went and got beds and pillows and blankets. My parents and the Williams they went to Sam's Club and bought food for everybody who was coming. Wethe community instantly started bringing thingsblankets, beds, tables, food. And later that night I went to the airport and picked up Steve and his grandma and grandpa and his aunt, who had flown in from Phoenix. And I took them home. And instantly Steve got out of the car before I even had the car stopped. He was jumping out and he justhe ran in the house, and he grabbed his mom. And we had aan entire week like that. Q: How has it been, since the funeral, for Steve? A: Steve is not a man of open emotions. He's certainly not going to sit around and tell people how he feels or what he's gone through since this has happened to him because no matter what has happened to him, and no matter what he feels, it can't compare to whatwhat his sister went through on February 7th. Q: Steve feels like he's responsible in any way? A: He feels extremely guilty. The guilt that he feels has almost destroyed him because he's the one who went to the restaurant and picked up his sister. He was going to bring her home to his mom. And he feels like if he would have never picked her up, she would still be in Phoenix and she'd still be alive. And he feels anger that anybody could possibly do this to his baby sister. Not only did he take away a sister and daughter. He took away grandbabies that Sandy would have given Darlene. He took away an aunt to my children andand cousins. And I also feel like he took away a very wonderful person who would have been a care giver to our community, who would have given back. She would have been a nurse, she would have been a good nurse, and she would have been taking care of people. Q: How has Darlene been since the timesince the funeral? A: Darlene is on a constant roller coaster of emotions. Darlene's a care giver and she has been for a long time and she is unable, for the first time in her whole life, to care for somebody, who's herself. Every day she goes to the hospital and she takes care of people who are dying, but she's dying inside and she can't take care of herself. Every day people talk about the cures for diseases that they're trying to find, well I wonder what about the cure for our hearts and our souls and ourthe holes that have been put there, and the loss that we suffer. What about a cure for that? How is Darlene supposed to take care of herself now? And take care of other people. Sheshe kept Darlene'sexcuse me, she kept Sandy's room exactly how she left it, for the longest time, because she would tell me, Sandy's going to come home and I want her room to be just like she left it when she comes home. Q: Is that after the funeral? A: Yes, sir. Q: How long did shedid she keep Sandy's room the way it was? A: I would say until late summer of this year. STATE: I have nothing further, Your Honor. {143} Ms. Minor had also described her friendship with Sandra Phillips, based on their mutual love of cheerleading and animals. She described Sandy's love of her pet iguana. She described Sandy's plan for the future: [S]he discussed with me how she also wanted to be like her mom, and she wanted to be a nurse. So we got really excited because we had this whole plan worked out where we could go to nursing school together and we could take the classes together and we could study together. I mean, it sounds kind of silly, but we were being girls and discussing how neat it would be to hang out together. {144} In his rebuttal closing at the penalty phase, the prosecutor ended his (rather short) argument with: This is the stuff that leaves parents in fear for our children and tell them, Don't take rides from strangers; don't accept candy from strangers. The story of Sandra Phillips is the stuff that we can tell our children or our grandchildren because it is the agony and the horror of every parent. He talked about Darlene's anguish: You saw Darlene as she watched that video, and you must have been watching her facial expressions. And you heard her, when she first testified she ... It was just natural. She stared off into space. God, I miss her. You heard from LaurieLaci, I'm sorry, what they suffered, and the horror. Darlene going on, beating on Jim Cheverie's chest; then running around the yard until the neighbors came out. The grieving process is natural to any tragedy especially when young people are involved. Society, I submit to you, has the right to grieve also. I don't expect of you, nor should I ask of you, to feel what Sandra Phillips felt before she died, that terror; or what the Phillips family suffered after her death. But society has a right to grieve. It has a right to mourn. And it has a right to grieve and mourn by its verdict in this particular case. You have the right to express your indignation of this awful act by your verdict. There's nothing wrong with the carefully considered expression of community outrage. Indeed, community/society outrage in this case is so, so appropriate. Because that precious thing you saw in that video and that light in her eye can never be replaced. No, but a verdict of death will replace that. Nothing will bring Sandra back; but there is still justice, a verdict of guilty. {145} Just reading the emotional testimony of Laci Minor is painful. The effect on the jury, who was present in the room when she spoke, is incalculable. The jury was not just a passive observer, it was being asked to do something about the family's pain: to return a death verdict. In my view, by the terms of the New Mexico Capital Sentencing Act, this inflammatory and emotionally compelling testimony was not admissible. See N.M. Const. art. II, §§ 13, 14, 18; U.S. Const. amends. V, VIII, XIV. {146} The State's victim impact evidence was more than a passing glimpse of the victim's life and the sorrow of survivor. A dramatic appeal to gut emotion has no place in the courtroom. Hance v. Zant, 696 F.2d 940, 952 (11th Cir.1983), overruled on other grounds by Brooks v. Kemp, 762 F.2d 1383, 1399 (11th Cir.1985). In my opinion, for the reasons set out above, the State's presentment of victim impact evidence requires a new sentencing hearing free of unnecessary passion certain to provoke unfair prejudice. {147} The majority holding otherwise, I respectfully dissent from Section II(H) of the majority opinion.