Opinion ID: 2582487
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 15

Heading: In-Life Photographs of Spokane County Victims

Text: ¶ 74 Yates contends that the trial court erred by admitting in-life photographs of the Spokane County victims. Following a pretrial hearing on the admissibility of the photographs, the trial court reserved its final ruling in order to review their relevance to the common scheme or plan aggravator and to afford the parties further opportunity to brief the issue. No further briefing was provided, and at trial all but 2 of the 10 photographs were admitted without a defense objection. The State concedes that the defense arguably preserved an objection to the in-life photographs of Oster and Derning. ¶ 75 In prior decisions, we have recognized that, because the State bears the burden of proving a victim's identity, the trial court's admission of in-life photographs of the victim was not an abuse of discretion. In Pirtle, we held that in-life photographs of the victims were relevant to prove identity [26] and that, under the required balancing of ER 403, the probative value of the photographs was not outweighed by unfair prejudice. 127 Wash.2d at 651-53, 904 P.2d 245. In considering the potential prejudice of the in-life photos, the Pirtle court compared such photographs to the more graphic postmortem photographs placed before the jury: The autopsy photos, however, are clearly more prejudicial than the `in-life' photos. In light of the gruesome photos of the victims that were also before the jury, it cannot be said that the `in-life' photos could have added much additional prejudice. Id. at 653, 904 P.2d 245 (citing State v. Furman, 122 Wash.2d 440, 452, 858 P.2d 1092 (1993) (observing that `[i]n life' pictures are not inherently prejudicial, particularly where as here the jury has seen `after death' pictures of the victim's body)). ¶ 76 Here, we must ask the same two questions that the Pirtle court asked  whether the in-life photographs are relevant under ER 401 and, if so, whether they are more probative than prejudicial under ER 403. We conclude, as did the Pirtle court, that the trial court's admission of the in-life photographs of the Spokane victims was not an abuse of discretion. For purposes of the admissibility inquiry, the fact that the photographs here are those of the Spokane victims and not of Mercer and Ellis is a distinction without a difference, given that the trial court's admission of evidence of the Spokane crimes under ER 404(b) has not been challenged. As to the relevance of the in-life photographs, the State argues that they were relevant to prove an element of Yates's overarching plan to murder women who were generally similar in appearance. Yates's victims were white or light-skinned women with dark hair  none of the women were blond, and [n]one of the women were African-Americans. 65 VRP at 6952. The State maintains that, in addition to demonstrating an element of the common plan, the in-life photographs . . . assisted the jury in processing what would otherwise appear to be repetitive testimony by attaching a face to the discovery and autopsy of each of the many bodies. Br. of Resp't at 154. For example, in addition to the in-life photograph of victim Oster, the State introduced (without objection at trial or challenge on appeal) a photograph of the recovery site of Oster's body, three photographs of her body at that site, and eight autopsy photographs (including photographs of the plastic bags from Oster's head, a close-up of bullet holes, and a Defect in Skin). CP at 4462-63, listing Exs. 355-63, 365-67. Similarly, along with the in-life photograph of Derning, the trial court admitted the State's proffered photographs (without a defense objection) of the recovery site of Derning's body, her body at that site, and Defects to Head. Id. at 4465, listing Exs. 423-26, 428-30. Applying the Pirtle court's reasoning, this court cannot conclude that the challenged in-life photographs of Oster and Derning could have added much additional prejudice, in light of the graphic after death photographs that were admitted without objection. 127 Wash.2d at 653, 904 P.2d 245. ¶ 77 The admission of the in-life photographs of Oster and Derning was not an abuse of discretion. The photographs were relevant to the State's proof of a common scheme or plan and assisted the jury in assimilating the evidence. Under the Pirtle court's ER 403 analysis, due to the admission of more graphic postmortem photographs, the potential unfair prejudice arising from the in-life photographs would be minimal and would not outweigh their probative value. [27]