Opinion ID: 4198315
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Aggravating Factors and Lay Testimony

Text: In order to render Petrocelli death-eligible, the State had to establish at least one aggravating factor. During the penalty phase of Petrocelli’s trial, the State sought to establish two such factors: (1) that the murder had been committed in the course of a robbery, and (2) that Petrocelli had previously been convicted of a violent felony, the kidnaping of his girlfriend Melanie Barker. (The first factor was later held by the Nevada Supreme Court to be invalid. See McConnell v. State, 102 P.3d 606, 624 (Nev. 2004) (per curiam). In reviewing Petrocelli’s third petition for postconviction relief, the Nevada Supreme Court held that use of this factor had been improper.) To establish the first factor, Prosecutor Laxalt put John Lucas on the stand. Lucas had been in the Washoe County Jail with Petrocelli for about five weeks after Petrocelli’s arrest for the Wilson murder. Lucas testified that Petrocelli had told him that he had shot Wilson in order to steal the PETROCELLI V. BAKER 11 truck. He also testified that Petrocelli said he was “going to get rid of” the district attorney as well as an unidentified woman Petrocelli characterized as a “snitch.” The second factor was Petrocelli’s conviction for kidnaping Barker. At trial, it was uncontested that he had later killed her. However, at the time of trial he had not been convicted of the killing. To establish the second factor, Prosecutor Laxalt called Melanie Barker’s mother, Maureen Lawler, to testify about the circumstances that had led to the kidnaping. The jury had already learned during the guilt phase, from Petrocelli’s testimony and from the testimony of an eye-witness, that Petrocelli had killed Barker. Lawler testified only as to the circumstances that had led to the kidnaping conviction. Lawler, who had lived with her daughter in the city of Kent, in western Washington, testified that Barker had gone to eastern Washington with Petrocelli for three days, that Barker had been “beaten on the face” and was “hysterical” when she returned home, and that at some point during the three days Barker had been told by Petrocelli that his friends would “do away with her.” Lawler testified that after Barker had told Petrocelli that her mother would have the police looking for her, “He agreed to take her back. . . . At that point, she got away from him.” Lawler also described a phone conversation, prior to the kidnaping, when Lawler had arranged for Petrocelli’s wallet to be taken to the police station. Petrocelli objected to her having done so, and she testified that Petrocelli said he “would blow me away.” Laxalt also called Joan Bleeker, who testified that Barker had come into a restroom during the time she was in eastern Washington and had asked Bleeker to call the police because she was being kidnaped. 12 PETROCELLI V. BAKER Petrocelli testified, presenting his version of what had happened during the three days in eastern Washington in an attempt to show, despite his conviction, that he had not really kidnaped Barker. According to Petrocelli, Barker went with him voluntarily; they were accompanied by a friend of Petrocelli; they went out in public, eating in restaurants and going to stores together; and she and Petrocelli got in a fight as they were driving back to western Washington. In the interval between the testimonies of Lawler and Bleeker, Prosecutor Laxalt played a tape recording of a portion of Petrocelli’s interrogation on April 20 in which Petrocelli described the Wilson killing. Petrocelli had cried during his in-court testimony when describing the Wilson killing. The tape recording is not in the record, but it is apparent from the transcript that Laxalt played the tape to contrast Petrocelli’s tearful demeanor during trial to an unemotional demeanor on April 20.