Opinion ID: 2187830
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: I Tatu- and andi s-v-T-tum

Text: Appellant contends that the I Tatu- and andi s-v-T-tum messages were totally irrelevant to any issue in the case. Appellant's argument is without merit. As discussed above, the state, to prove the identity of the killer, sought to introduce into evidence the linoleum bearing the messages. To do so, the state was obliged to lay a foundation for the evidence. The writings suggest, by their mention of Tatum and their use of the personal pronoun I, that Brandie Kearnes was the author. They are, therefore, probative on the issue of who wrote the messages. In addition, the message It was Joh- on the linoluem was hearsay that could not have been admitted unless the state could prove that the messages were Brandie's dying declarations. To prove this, the state was required to demonstrate that the messages were written while Brandie believed that death was imminent and that she had no hope of recovery. State v. Liggins, 725 S.W.2d 75, 76 (Mo.App.1987). The state is allowed to demonstrate such a belief by any means.... It is enough if, from all the circumstances, it satisfactorily appears that such was the condition of the declarant's mind at the time of the declarations. State v. Brandt, 467 S.W.2d 948, 952 (Mo.1971) (quoting State v. Proctor, 269 S.W.2d 624, 625 (Mo.1954)). Brandie Kearnes's expression of her love for her child is relevant to whether she believed that she was about to die. The messages, furthermore, are more probative than prejudicial, although they are written with the blood of Brandie Kearnes. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted the I Tatu- and andi s-v-T-tum messages.