Opinion ID: 5046
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: evidence about the victim

Text: Wiley argues that the admission of evidence about the character and worth of the victim, including his reputation in the community as a generous person and his relationship with his family, violated his right to a fair trial. Wiley repeatedly objected at trial and raised the issue on direct appeal, but the Mississippi Supreme Court rejected his claim. Wiley II, 484 So. 2d at 348. The court refused to consider the claim because of 42 the res judicata principles applicable on collateral review. Wiley III, 517 So. 2d at 1377. Claims concerning evidence of this sort are now governed by Payne v. Tennessee, --- U.S. ---, 111 S. Ct. 2597 (1991).21 The Court in Payne observed that [i]n the majority of cases, . . . victim impact evidence serves entirely legitimate purposes. Thus, [a] State may legitimately conclude that evidence about the victim and about the impact of the murder on the victim's family is relevant to the jury's decision as to whether the death penalty should be imposed. Id. at 2608-09. Victim impact evidence is constitutionally acceptable so long as it is not so unduly prejudicial that it renders the trial fundamentally unfair. Id. at 2608. The evidence to which Wiley objects came from Turner's wife, Marie. She testified about the places she and her husband had lived in Mississippi, his operation of the store, her assistance in the law enforcement investigation, and Turner's character. She agreed that Turner was not a violent or mean person, that he was known in the community as Mr. Good Buddy, and that he occasionally loaned small amounts of money. This evidence hardly reaches the unduly prejudicial level required under Payne for a constitutional violation. Neither the evidence nor the prosecutor's argument in this case comes anywhere near the emotional appeal made by the prosecutor in Payne. See id. at 21 Payne was decided more than one year after the district court issued its memorandum opinion. 43 2603 (reciting testimony and prosecutor's closing argument). It is much more like the evidence and argument we found acceptable in Black v. Collins, 962 F.2d 395 (5th Cir. 1992), where there was testimony that the victim was a hard-working, devoted wife and mother, and the prosecutor commented on the need of the victim's son for counseling. Id. at 408 & n.12. Accordingly, the district court correctly rejected this claim.