Legal Document

502 U.S. 62 112 S.Ct. 475 116 L.Ed.2d 385 Wayne ESTELLE, Warden, Petitionerv.Mark Owen McGUIRE. No. 90-1074. Argued Oct. 9, 1991. Decided Dec. 4, Syllabus Respondent McGuire was found guilty in a California state court of the second-degree murder his infant daughter, Tori. Among prosecution's witnesses were two physicians, who testified that Tori battered child had suffered prior injuries. The testimony revealed evidence rectal tearing, which at least six weeks old, and partially healed rib fractures, approximately seven old. trial instructed jury injury could be considered for "the limited purpose determining if it tends to show . clear connection between other offense[s] one [McGuire] is accused, so may logically concluded Defendant committed offenses, he also crime charged this case." State Court Appeal upheld conviction, finding introduction proper under law prove "battered syndrome," exists when has sustained repeated and/or serious injuries by nonaccidental means. Subsequently, Federal District denied McGuire's petition habeas corpus. Appeals reversed, concluding arbitrary fundamentally unfair violation due process. It ruled erroneously admitted establish syndrome, because there no linking claim made died accidently, instruction on use act allowed guilt based simply judgment acts. Held: Neither admission challenged nor as its rises level process violation. Pp. 67-75. (a) evidence, although not linked himself, probative question intent with person caused Tori's acted, since demonstrated her death result an intentional someone, accident. fact accidentally did relieve prosecution burden all essential elements beyond reasonable doubt. By eliminating possibility accident, clearly such element: killing intentional. improper base holding conclusion incorrectly law, province federal reexamine determinations questions. Lewis v. Jeffers, 497 ----, 110 3092, 111 606. 67-70. (b) erred consider more than proof syndrome. instruction's language forecloses directed find court's inclusion words "if offenses" unquestionably left determine whether acts deciding only believed those To extent have inflicted injuries, sufficient record support conclusion. Also rejected argument that, even determination perpetrator jury, propensity instruction, allowing part upon therefore disposition commit type crime. While ambiguous, "reasonable likelihood" would it, read context instructions, authorized evidence. Boyde California, 494 370, 380, 1190, 108 316. seems far likely understood mean "clear connection" instant then charged. This parallels showing intent, identity, motive, or plan, see, e.g., Fed.Rule Evid. 404(b). More importantly, specifically guarded against possible misuse advising believed, "a bad character ha[d] crimes." belief violated judge interpreted code ground relief. 70-75. 902 F.2d 749 (CA9 1990), reversed. REHNQUIST, C.J., delivered opinion Court, WHITE, BLACKMUN, SCALIA, KENNEDY, SOUTER, JJ., joined, Part I STEVENS O'CONNOR, joined. J., filed concurring dissenting part, STEVENS, THOMAS, took consideration decision case. Dane R. Gillette, San Francisco, Cal., petitioner. Ann Hardgrove Voris, respondent. THE CHIEF JUSTICE Court. 1 Mark daughter. After unsuccessfully challenging conviction appeal courts, sought relief United States Ninth Circuit set aside conviction. (1990). We hold doing exceeded scope review convictions. 2 wife brought their six-month-old Tori, hospital Hayward, California. baby bluish color breathing. attending physician noticed large relatively recent bruise chest multiple bruises around well black blue marks ears. Efforts revive unsuccessful; 45 minutes after being hospital. An autopsy 17 contusions baby's chest, 29 abdominal area, split liver, pancreas, lacerated intestine, damage heart lungs. uncovered 3 police questioned wife. stated must resulted from fall off family couch. He told went out make telephone call, upstairs, leaving lying couch; heard cry, came back downstairs floor. officer expressed skepticism explanation, replied "[m]aybe some Mexicans in" while upstairs. Id., 751. During separate questioning, she hit unsure husband done so. 4 murder. At trial, introduced both statements medical including tearing fractured ribs. Two physicians child, relying neighbor seen carry arms car roughly pinch cheeks together cried. added fear alone McGuire, been rough "did things" her. 5 In addition, called witness overheard conversation emergency room night death. According witness, several times insistently asked, "What really happened?" "didn't know," "guessed" fell His continued press answer, stating, "I am very patient. can wait long time. want know what happened." Finally, alright left. You are responsible." App. 44; Brief Amicus Curiae 3-4. testify having granted transactional immunity future prosecution. contrast statement declarations hospital, beaten day before arrived home. convicted 6 affirmed observed syndrome." That syndrome People Bledsoe, 36 Cal.3d 236, 249, 203 Cal.Rptr. 450, 458, 681 P.2d 291, 299 (1984). reviewing authority subject, "proof 'prior injuries' tending 'battered syndrome' patently proper." 47. Supreme review. 7 corpus Northern reversed petition. accidentally. acts.1 conjunction prejudicial "rendered [McGuire's] unfair" F.2d, 753. none alleged errors rise violation, reverse. 8 * first justified ruling rights relied "incorrectly pursuant law." 754. Such inquiry, however, many "federal does lie 3102, 606 (1990); see Pulley Harris, 465 37, 41, 104 871, 874-75, 79 Today, we reemphasize conducting review, Constitution, laws, treaties States. 28 U.S.C. § 2241; Rose Hodges, 423 19, 21, 96 175, 177, 46 162 (1975) (per curiam ).2 9 thus turn constitutional rights. allows introduce expert related order supra, Cal.3d, Cal.Rptr., P.2d, 299; Landeros Flood, 399, 409, 131 69, 73, 551 389, 393 (1976); Jackson, 18 Cal.App.3d 504, 506-508, 95 919, 921-922 (1971). demonstration "simply indicates [serious, injuries] accidental means." 507, 921. Thus, demonstrating helps hands another falling couch, example; "other," whoever be, intentionally. When offered certain product abuse, rather relevant though purport identity might See id., 921-922; 299. Because murder, required defendant's act. Proof status helped do just that; any direct Appeals, ignored principle admitted. For example, "[e]vidence cannot value unless party connects defendant meaningful way." conclude presented directly not, acted. 10 inadmissible, theory accidentally, irrelevant violative ignores criminal offense second degree case, demonstrate Cal.Penal Code Ann. §§ 187, 189 (West 1988). regarding element, especially light claimed injured herself should excluded raise defense trial. But every element relieved tactical contest offense. courts "[a] simple plea puts charged." Mathews States, 485 58, 64-65, 883, 887, 99 54 (1988). parties given us reason think rule different nothing Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment requires refrain introducing chooses point. 11 Concluding, do, issue need explore further apparent assumption guaranteed received Spencer Texas, 554, 563-564, 87 648, 653-654, (1967) ("Cases proceeded premise guarantees fundamental fairness never thought cases rulemaking organ promulgation rules procedure") (citations omitted). II 12 rely solely unconstitutional. court, forth n. 1, thereby focuses portion explaining "was you 41. 13 argues despite absence offenses. Furthermore, argues, mistaken impression previously harmed Under reading, transformed into This, contends, violates Clause. 14 arguing point, makes much giving deviated standard 2.50 Jury Instructions, Criminal (4th ed. 1979) (CALJIC).3 As above, allegedly incorrect basis Marshall Lonberger, 459 422, 438, 6, 103 843, 853, 74 646 (1983) ("[T]he permit engage finely tuned wisdom evidentiary rules"). grant relief, appellate deficient comparison CALJIC model. Nor our powers allow reverse Evidence admissible Cal.Evid.Code 1101(b) "whether ailing itself infected entire resulting process." Cupp Naughten, 414 141, 147, 94 396, 400-01, 38 368 (1973); Henderson Kibbe, 431 145, 154, 97 1730, 1736-37, 52 (1977); Donnelly DeChristoforo, 416 637, 643, 1868, 1871, 40 (1974) (" '[I]t established merely undesirable, erroneous, "universally condemned," but [constitutional right]' "). "may judged artificial isolation," instructions whole record. U.S., S.Ct., 400-01. ambiguous here, inquire likelihood applied way" Constitution. 316 (1990).4 And bear mind previous admonition "have defined category infractions violate 'fundamental fairness' narrowly." Dowling 493 342, 352, 668, 674, 107 708 "Beyond specific enumerated Bill Rights, operation." Ibid. 15 claims effectively taking jury. One argue "two offense[s]" referred pinching child's lifting arm. context, most interpretation reference lack him them. foreclosed, instruction. included offenses." phrase, acts; Therefore, believe used factor deliberation, observe sustain preponderance Cf. Simon, 184 125, 134, 228 855, 858 (Sup.1986); Huddleston 681, 690, 1496, 1501-02, 771 narrowed group perpetrators wife, they people regularly caring during short life. Cal.App.3d, 921 ("Only someone 'caring' continuing opportunity inflict these types injuries; isolated contact vicious stranger pattern successive stretching through months"). A treat occasions, scared leave her; abuse way. died, body bathing asked replied, don't know, care her." 131. described, along record, convinces conclude, desired, 16 contends constituted "propensity" been, pure simple. ----. 71, offenses permitted parallel familiar plan. See, "[prior injury] received, you[,] supra. Especially limiting provision, reject viewed instruction.5 neither use, "so infused unfairness deny Lisenba 314 219, 228, 280, 286, 86 L.Ed. 166 (1941); 1871. Reversed. 19 Justice THOMAS 20 whom joins, part. 21 agree relevant. intended kill causation intent. join Court's opinion. 22 misapplied similar offense, "it my view, encouraged assume abuser murderer. proving murderer doubt, error remand harmless. 23 6-month-old repeatedly course life horrifying take special inform significance notes, " 'indicates means,' ante, 68 (quoting 507; (1971)). status, "not McGuire," properly accident." Ante, 69. Precisely relevance tied abuser, clarifying required. 24 Instead gave doing, himself appears assumed attributed McGuire. constituting trial." 40. concedes encompasses positively identified actor (carrying arm cheeks) brutal (the ribs tearing). grouping distinct classes created identified—at eyes judge—as abuser. 25 implying compounded finds "likely" 'clear connection' 75. understand single sentence two-step 26 "consider" "committed similar" "determin[e]" ones 40, instruct "determine" Court—"it case"—does jury's role ascertain abuse. Rather, coming middle reasonably already killed 27 Although narrowly," (1990), guarantee doubt re Winship, 397 358, 364, 90 1068, 1072-73, (1970); McMillan Pennsylvania, 477 79, 85, 106 2411, 2415-16, 91 67 (1986). "prohibits using presumptions charge effect relieving persuasion crime." Francis Franklin, 471 307, 313, 105 1965, 1970, 85 344 (1985); Sandstrom Montana, 442 510, 2450, 61 39 (1979). held mandatory Patterson New York, 432 197, 215, 2319, 2329-30, 53 281 Sandstrom, 520-524, 2457-2459. contrast, permissive inference still persuading suggested inferred predicate facts proved. Ulster County Allen, 140, 157-163, 2213, 2224-2228, 60 777 perhaps posit drawn. wording choice "logically conclud[e]" once fatal ones.* say confidence mere drawing proven facts, treated presumption killer Had worded, circumstantial all, points out, "[t]he Tori." 74. important remember Tori—Daisy McGuire—took stand testified, immunity, July 7, 1981. 30 deliberated three days returning verdict guilty. Any evaluation conducted background Daisy surprise dilemma posed "ambiguous," 72, assumptions conclusions about where inconsistent Clause, remanded erroneous harmless, followed here. 526-527, 2460-2461; Clark, 478 570, 584, 3101, 3109, 92 460 (1986); Carella 491 263, 266-267, 109 2419, 2420-2421, 218 (1989) ). jury: "Evidence crimes. things: "1. impeachment cause afraid Defendant, "2. "3. "For weigh same manner purpose." 40-41. regard, reached Blair McCarthy, 881 602 (1989), cert. granted, 498 39, 16, vacated moot remanded, 377, 391 prejudiced defendant. 603-604. discussion above clear, violations provide Meticulous compliance 2.50, led show: "A characteristic method, plan scheme commission case tend accused (portion italics omitted actual trial). acknowledge later Cage Louisiana, 328, 339 Yates Evatt, 500 1884, 114 (1991), endorsing instructions. Cage, 329 ("In construing how jurors whole"); Yates, 1892 ("We juror [instruction] ."). Boyde, point settle instructions—the standard—after considering phrasings 379-380, ---- - (considering rejecting standards examination either "could" "would" done). So again speak voice issue, now disapprove reaffirm Boyde. reach express "prior crimes" dispositive, worth noting California's model "evidence revised eliminate phrase concluded." (5th 1987).

Classification Label: 0