We are of the opinion that defense counsel, and his defense team, were given a reasonable opportunity to examine and prepare to use the statements in cross-examining April Ward. The Defendant specifically complains of the trial court's interruption of his cross-examination of Christy Jones Scott and of Officer Sam Owenby, both of which interruptions were apparently attempts to keep the examination moving along; and of the court's statements during the cross-examination of Dr. Cleland Blake that what the doctor had told the jury was "just what he's told them" and that questions about why the doctor took fingernail clippings were academic and the answer obvious to anyone who had watched the television show Quincy. Gary J. Aguirre is an American lawyer, former investigator with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and whistleblower . See, e.g., Bryant v. State, 539 S.W.2d 816, 819 (Tenn. Crim. Tom Bentley, who worked on the Defendant's car sometime after the killing, testified that he had used pieces of blue terry cloth towel from the trunk of the Defendant's car as grease rags. Hence, courts have suggested that both the Sixth Amendment's right to compulsory process, Id., and the right to confrontation are implicated in the violation of the procedural guarantees of Rule 26.2. View Gina Caughron's record in Walland, TN including current phone number, address, relatives, background check report, and property record with Whitepages. No. has since been changed to "Every person is presumed competent to be a witness except as otherwise provided in these rules or by statute.". April Ward's mother, Lettie Marie Cruze, worked at the Turquoise Jewelry Shop in Settler's Village, a group of shops in Pigeon Forge. 111-129.) Sometime within the following two or three weeks, Christy Jones Scott discovered a silver, turquoise and coral ring with a thunderbird design lying on the ground beside her mother's truck, which was still parked at her mother's house. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google. Testimony about April's emotional reaction to the murder tends to bolster her credibility, as does testimony about her continued contact with the Defendant. The admission of expert testimony is largely in the discretion of the trial judge. Nevertheless, the trial judge not only forced defense counsel to begin his cross-examination of April Ward at that late hour, but he also failed to recess until cross-examination was completed, some considerable period of time later that evening. His fingerprints were not found in the house. See, e.g., State v. Robinson, 618 S.W.2d 754 (Tenn. Crim. The trial court also has broad discretion in controlling the course and conduct of the trial. He reminded the trial judge that he had not received the package of statements until after court adjourned the previous night. To this the trial judge responded: The jury was brought back to the court-room, and the district attorney continued his direct examination of April Ward. The first day was consumed by arguments and rulings on unfinished pretrial business, including defense counsel's request that the trial court order early production of witness statements, and by selection of the jury. App. The police made little progress in the investigation of the Jones homicide during the year after the homicide. Building on its ruling in Clancy, the United States Supreme Court noted in Goldberg v. United States: 425 U.S. 94, 111, note 21, 96 S. Ct. 1338, 1348, note 21, 47 L. Ed. The Defendant, Gary June Caughron, appeals directly to this Court his conviction of first degree premeditated murder and the sentence of death imposed by the jury, and his convictions of first degree burglary, and assault with intent to commit rape. According to the history given by the Defendant, his mother had started acting "quite wild" after the divorce, drinking and dating. Obviously, Rule 26.2(c) applies to such pretrial motion hearings. Defendant's next objection was to the testimony of April's mother that the victim had told her that as a rule she did not get involved in other people's affairs but that she thought "April was a sweet little girl and she didn't trust Gary Caughron." Taylor, of course, stands for the obvious proposition that on motion, "a[] statement of the witness that relates to the subject matter concerning which the witness has testified" must be "produce[d] for the examination and use of the moving party," but only "[a]fter [that] witness has testified on direct examination." This is not a statutory aggravating circumstance although it is similar to the circumstance in T.C.A. April later testified that after the Defendant hit Jones several times with the pool stick, Jones fell across her bed, became silent and stopped moaning. The physical and psychological demands on an attorney in trial, especially a criminal trial involving a capital offense, are heavy. ), cert. Based on this authority, "the serious nature of [the] case," and the witness's testimony that the prosecutor's letter influenced his decision not to talk to defense counsel, the court reversed the conviction and remanded the case for a new trial. Create, edit, and maintain all scheduling . He called the victim a "bitch." It must be clearly shown that a trial court has abused its discretion in refusing to grant a continuance before that decision will be disturbed on appeal. Finally, although the trial court denied the motion for continuance on the mistaken belief that FBI Agent Doug Dedrick would testify, Agent Dedrick's testimony was presented to the jury through stipulation. A list of the contradictions in the six statements and the development of a strategy for their effective use on cross-examination would, of course, take even longer. Then, on June 22, 1988, they took the first of six statements they would obtain from April Ward. Berating defense counsel for his repeated efforts to secure a recess, the trial judge said: Following the brief recess, the trial judge added: Before beginning an analysis of the legal principles applicable to these facts, two observations seem pertinent, both based on a careful reading of the transcript in this case. The Defendant had also talked to Huskey about tying up women during sex and said that "slapping them on the butt really turned him on.". For example, in Gregory v. United States, 369 F.2d 185 (D.C. Cir.1966), remanded, 410 F.2d 1016 (D.C. Cir.1969), cert. In Ingraldi, by failing to move for a continuance and then thoroughly cross-examining the witness, the defense counsel cured a potential Brady violation. In State v. Tanner, 175 W. Va. 264, 332 S.E.2d 277, 279 (1985), the Court held: "The question of whether the error was harmless or prejudicial hinges upon whether there was a substantial discrepancy between the contents of the prior statement or report and the witness's testimony during trial.". The court found it "grossly unfair" to permit this kind of prosecutorial misconduct, which had "unfairly hampered the defendants' investigation." Ward testified that she and Caughron also sat on the floor and drank Jones' blood from shot glasses. Gary Allen Caughron, 51, of Cameron died Tuesday, June 2, 2015, in Fort Smith, Ark. Id. App. Phillips had given a statement to law enforcement officials on July 15, 1987, in which he stated that two persons, a man and a woman who were not the defendant and April Ward, had approached him about robbing and killing a woman in Pigeon Forge, possibly the victim Dorothy Ann Jones, although Phillips did not give the woman's name. Defense counsel did not object to a corrected charge. Finally, Defendant complains that the judge told the jury that they did not have to look at Ogle's boot and a full-scale photograph of the footprint on the door when these items were passed as exhibits. Sometime after court adjourned at 7:15 p.m., the district attorney handed defense counsel a package containing the pretrial statements of all prospective witnesses for the state, including April Ward. Atty., Sevierville, for appellee. Byrnes v. United States, 327 F.2d 825, 832 (9th Cir.1964). To insist on honoring the due process rights of the accused is an obligation imposed on courts and the judicial system by the state and federal constitutions. The Goldberg court cited with approval Justice Brennan's dissenting opinion in Rosenberg v. United States, 360 U.S. 367, 373, 79 S. Ct. 1231, 3 L. Ed. For example, in Clancy v. United States, 365 U.S. 312, 81 S. Ct. 645, 5 L. Ed. App. 373 U.S. at 84, 83 S. Ct. at 1195. Second, despite the trial court's assessment of the statements in question as "not that complex," "not that different" from one another, and containing "nothing worthwhile, relevant or germane," a review of April Ward's statements demonstrates clearly that they were a powerful source of ammunition with which to impeach her testimony, had defense counsel been permitted the time necessary to review them and prepare his cross-examination in light of their content. Under T.R.E. Again, the import of this testimony was that the conversation between April's mother and the victim occurred, not that the victim's statement was true. App. DAUGHTREY, J., and REID, C.J., dissent. 02/14/94 STATE TENNESSEE v. VICTOR JAMES CAZES . The court was also requested to have copies of all these files sealed and filed for any appeal. What is not *551 included in the majority opinion is a recitation of the procedural background of the trial, putting in context the "Jencks motion" made by defense counsel at various points during the proceedings. We therefore affirm the convictions and the sentences. denied 429 U.S. 821, 97 S. Ct. 69, 50 L. Ed. The Defendant avers that the trial court erred in not permitting him to make the final closing argument at sentencing. It is not clearly established in the record that the State violated Rule 16(a)(1)(A); but, if the State did violate the Rule, the Defendant has not shown any actual prejudice caused by failure to comply with the discovery order which would require exclusion of this evidence. The prosecution did, however, insist that she be kept at home and then took advantage of her vulnerability and fear of punishment by advising her mother not to let April discuss the case with the defendant's attorneys. Moreover, the cumulative prejudice resulting from the due process violations in this case, in which the defendant has been convicted and sentenced to death, cannot be written off as harmless error. The trial court felt that the Defendant had failed to exercise due diligence in examining the door. Officer Tippens was one of the first officers on the scene the day the murder was discovered. It should be noted, however, that perhaps the most ghoulish aspect of April Ward's testimony, to the effect that she and Caughron drank the victim's blood out of shot-glasses as she lay dying nearby, nowhere appears in any of Ward's prior statements,[8] a fact of which counsel may have been totally unaware,[9] since he had not had an adequate opportunity to read and compare all the statements. Leadership role overseeing approximately 40 technicians in a fast paced environment. [4] As to the remainder of Rule 26.2, subsections (b) and (c) set out the procedure for determining whether the entire statement of a witness, or only part of it, is producible; subsection (f) requires application of the rule to pretrial hearings in the criminal court; and subsection (g) defines what constitutes a statement under the rule. Respondent filed a reply in support of his motion on June 27, 2017 (Doc. With nothing more to go on than these allegations, the trial court did not err in excluding the statements. See, e.g., Freeman v. State of *546 Georgia, 599 F.2d 65, 69 (5th Cir.1979), cert. Under State v. Banks, 564 S.W.2d 947 (Tenn. 1978), the trial court did not abuse its discretion in permitting their introduction. Their efforts are unappreciated by the public generally and undercompensated by the justice system they serve. Finally, in United States v. Moceri, 359 F. Supp. Knoxville, Tennessee. 2d at 1249 (citing Gallman, 195 So. Sharon B Caughron. Id. The trial court refused to continue the case because Tippens' testimony would be cumulative in light of the fact that there were several other investigating officers who should have possessed the same knowledge. A similar error occurred in this case. They walked to the victim's house from the parking lot of a nearby nursing home, where they had left the Oldsmobile. The court urged the defense counsel to move along by directing the examination to the evidence that was material and important for the jury to consider. She said that he had been in special education classes, where he had done well. The week before the murder, according to April, she and the Defendant began talking about going to the victim's house. Atty. Hence, under Tennessee law, as under federal law, a prosecutor's refusal to produce the statements prior to direct examination cannot be held to be prejudicial error, even though it is often extolled as "the better practice." Noting that the statements were admitted falsehoods, the trial court refused to allow their introduction. Likewise, in State v. Williams, 690 S.W.2d 517, 525 (Tenn. 1985), this Court held that "when the reliability of a witness may well *548 be determinative of guilt or innocence, the non-disclosure of evidence affecting his credibility may justify a new trial, regardless of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecutor." This advance production satisfied the State's duty under Rule 26.2 and avoided the needless delay of the trial. denied, 439 U.S. 873, 99 S. Ct. 207, 58 L. Ed. 608 and 609, the trial court is given broad discretion in the timing of its decisions on the admissibility of evidence. Outside, she said, the Defendant used the knife he had given her to cut the telephone lines to make it appear that whoever had killed Jones had not wanted her to use the telephone. Dr. Blake concluded that Jones had died as a result of asphyxiation while unconscious. In United States v. Enright, 579 F.2d 980 (6th Cir.1978), the Sixth Circuit held that no due process Brady violation occurred because the failure to disclose material exculpatory evidence had been discovered in time for "full and adequate correction." We are in agreement with the conclusion of the trial judge that Ward's testimony, as it related to the victim's statements, was not hearsay inasmuch as it was not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. The Defendant has also failed to show that a different result would have been reached if the continuance had been granted. Jerry Springer longtime syndicated talk-show host and former Cincinnati mayor died Thursday at his home in the suburbs of Chicago. It is axiomatic that a trial judge should exercise care not to express any thought that might lead the jury to infer that the judge is in favor of or against the defendant in a criminal trial. At the hearing, the trial judge asked Ward some general questions, some questions about how she was doing in school and how her counseling was proceeding, and some questions about her awareness of her testimony. She said that after the two of them undressed, Caughron rubbed the victim's blood on both their bodies as they engaged in sex on the floor beside the bed where Jones lay. When April's mother commented that "he looked like some sort of wild woman got a hold of him the night before," he "sniggered" and said, "No, I just got in a fight over a beer in a bar in Newport." The record reflects that the state relied on it in arguing aggravating circumstances during the penalty phase of the proceedings. The phone numbers associated with Judy: (478) 923-6928 (Bellsouth Telecommunications, LLC), (478) 284-7727 (Sprint Spectrum LPBellsouth Telecommunications, LLC). The State asserts that this issue should be treated as waived because, as the State correctly points out, the Defendant has failed to cite to the location in the record of the specific questions of which he complains. The trial judge's actions were unnecessary but did not deprive Defendant of a fair trial or prejudice him in any way. In turn, he denied knowing the victim, denied any involvement in her death, and denied his actions the day after the killing. D. Paine, Tennessee Law of Evidence, 103.3 (2d ed. The FBI developed no forensic evidence implicating Caughron, despite extensive testing on fingerprints, shoeprints, blood and other fluids, and fibers. In D. Paine, Tennessee Law of Evidence, 611.6 (2nd ed. 39-13-204(d), specifically grants the State the right of closing. Children . The Defendant, Gary June Caughron, appeals directly to this Court his conviction of first degree premeditated murder and the sentence of death imposed by the jury, and his convictions of first degree burglary, and assault with intent to commit rape. Dr. Stefanie K. Johnson. Edward was born on May 13 1911, in Obion County, Tn.. Alleen was born on November 17 1912, in Ridgely, Tn.. 16(a)(1)(A). This Court has previously found this issue meritless. At the very least, the majority should offer some guidance on the nature and extent of the trial court's discretion in this area of *550 the law and should set standards for determining when an abuse of that discretion has occurred. T.C.A. Caughron cleaned himself in the store's restroom. Houston, Texas, United States. At sentencing the trial court instructed as an aggravating circumstance: "The defendant allowed the victim to be treated with exceptional cruelty during the commission of the offense." The court in the present case, however, was unusually active in directing the form that questioning should take. Hence, both the due process violation by police in directing April Ward's mother not to let her talk to defense counsel, and the extenuation of that due process violation by the prosecutor in wrongfully withholding Brady material, could have been overcome in this case, had the trial court given defense counsel an adequate opportunity to review that material at an appropriate point during the trial. It points out the obvious that April Ward's testimony not only made her the prosecution's "linchpin witness," but also constituted virtually the entire case for the state. In the past, Michael has also been known as Michael G Caughron, Michael Gary Caughron, Mike G Caughron, Michael Cauchron and Michael Coughron. 4 Samuel Frank Downey vs. State of Tennessee (03C01-9801-CR-00027) Hamilton Criminal Douglas Meyer 218154 Joseph M. Tipton Its language was also incorporated into Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 26. But this is not a routine case it is a capital case, one in which the defendant was ultimately sentenced to execution, based entirely on the testimony of 16-year-old April Ward, an accomplice who had given police a total of six contradictory statements, all of which had been systematically withheld from defense counsel despite legitimate efforts, both informal and formal, to obtain them prior to and at the time of trial. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in requiring the Defendant to object when questions were actually asked. A due process violation requires more than the suppression of significant exculpatory evidence, however. Dr. Madeline Pareau, a clinical psychologist, testified that Defendant's full IQ was 78, "just a little above mentally retarded classification." denied, 396 U.S. 865, 90 S. Ct. 143, 24 L. Ed. Lettie Marie Cruze, April's mother, testified that she had sold the Defendant a silver ring with turquoise and coral inlay and a thunderbird design. We agree with those circuits holding that a defendant must show that the failure to earlier disclose prejudiced him because it came so late that the information disclosed could not be effectively used at trial." 1983). She testified that the Defendant kicked in the bedroom door, which was locked. Right now Gary is an Owner at Caurhon Gary. ), cert. His father, whom Pareau described as "overtly psychotic," was an alcoholic and had physically abused his mother until their divorce. He was a member of Millican Grove Baptist Church where he attended and taught Sunday school for many years. State v. Elliott, 703 S.W.2d 171, 176 (Tenn. Crim. We find no error in the guilt phase or sentencing phase of this case. Carter v. Rafferty, 826 F.2d 1299, 1308 (3d Cir.1987). He also asked April to watch Jones as she closed her shop and see where she put her money, and to find out if Jones was married and had a telephone or pets. App. Bowman v. State, 598 S.W.2d 809, 812 (Tenn. Crim. He apologized to the trial judge for having to ask for a recess, and indicated that the defense had tried to avoid the delay by seeking pretrial discovery of the witnesses' statements, an effort that had proved unsuccessful. The Defendant told Haynes that when he woke up the next morning he had blood all over him and that he did not know whether or not he had killed the victim. 611(c) provides that "[l]eading questions should not be used on the direct examination of a witness except as to develop testimony." April testified that Caughron entered the house by himself and then summoned her inside. The phone lines to the house had been cut. As one commentator has noted, once a Jencks statement is deemed producible, "the defendant's right to the statement is virtually absolute." At 4:05 p.m. the next day, shortly before the conclusion of the direct examination of April Ward, counsel for Defendant asked the court to allow him to start his cross-examination the next morning. For persons dying between 1940-1997, you can order a copy of the death certificate via Ancestry.com for a fee. See, e.g., State v. Jenkins, supra, 733 S.W.2d at 532; Pique v. State, 480 S.W.2d 546, 550-551 (Tenn. Crim. Defense counsel apparently did not know until he received these documents from the prosecutor that April Ward had made six separate statements to police. *529 Charles W. Burson, Atty. Accord, United States v. Winner, 666 F.2d 447, 448-449 (10th Cir.1981); United States v. Knowles, 594 F.2d 753, 755 (9th Cir.1979); United States v. Aaron, 457 F.2d 865, 869 (2nd Cir.1972). 2d 983 (1983). See also United States v. Peters, 732 F.2d 1004 (1st Cir.1984); United States v. Higgs, 713 F.2d 39, 44 (3d Cir.1983); United States v. Xheka, 704 F.2d 974, 981 (7th Cir.1983); United States v. McPartlin, 595 F.2d 1321, 1346 (7th Cir. Gary Caughroncurrently lives in Capitan, NM; in the past Gary has also lived in Ruidoso NM. Gary J. Aguirre. The sentencing phase of the trial was much briefer, primarily because the state presented no further proof and the Defendant called only four witnesses. Where a juror is not legally disqualified or there is no inherent prejudice, the burden is on the Defendant to show that a juror is in some way biased or prejudiced. 39-2-205(c)(4)], we find that the sentence of death was not imposed in an arbitrary fashion, that the evidence supports the jury's finding of the statutory aggravating circumstance, and that the evidence supports the jury's finding of the absence of any mitigating circumstances sufficiently substantial to outweigh the aggravating circumstance so found. Crime Laboratory personnel. Id. As to the latter right, the United States Court of Appeal has noted: Krilich, supra, at 682 (holding that a Jencks violation "presents an issue of sufficient constitutional dimension to warrant consideration under 28 U.S.C. 1999) Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Filed: February 5th, 1999 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: None known Docket Number: 03C01-9707-CC-00301 Author: Joseph Tipton Download Original Another time he said, "If I'm convicted of what I've done, someone will have to pay." Select this result to view Gary Richard Caughron's phone number, address, and more. These statements certainly would not support a murder conviction in the absence of April Ward's testimony. Subsection (d) states that the court "may recess proceedings in the trial for the examination of such statement and for preparation for its use in the trial." She described her nephew as "slow" and said that he had a good attitude since he had been in jail. It fails to take into account the fact that almost half this period of time, nine hours, was spent in court during the course of the trial. The Defendant asserts that no evidence corroborates the testimony of April Ward, his accomplice. Author of the National Bestseller INCLUSIFY. In Dr. Pareau's opinion, Caughron had received inadequate parenting, and there had been no consistency in his relationships. Because there were questions about the juror's objectivity and the Defendant was at "enormous risk," the court removed the juror. [8] And, no bloody shot-glasses were found at the scene of the crime. However, the Tennessee rule applies to all pretrial motions under Rule 12(b). After allowing the Defendant to approach the bench prior to the testimony of Dr. Cleland Blake, April Ward, Jimmy Lynn Huskey, and Lettie Marie Cruze, when the State called witness Robert Yoakum, and defense counsel again approached the bench, the trial court refused to continue to "pre-review" the testimony, told defense counsel to object to questions as they were asked, and promised that it would then rule on the objections. 2d 1103 (1957). April testified that she hated Jones because she had tried to separate her and the Defendant by going to her mother. Gary June Concord, MA Barnes and Noble Education (BNED) VP--Head of Institutional Sales (Oct 2019 - Apr 2021) Florida State University Certificate (2001 - 2002) Media professional, angel investor, coach Gary June Columbus, Ohio Police Officer - Department of Gary June Portsmouth, OH Sales Director Gary & June Thompson Arlington, TX Gary June See Graves v. State, 489 S.W.2d 74, 81 (Tenn. Crim. at 770). The Defendant taunted the victim, despite her pleading, "Please don't hurt me," and told her she was going to die. 1990), the writers suggest that leading questions may be used to shorten the time needed for a witness to testify or to facilitate the direct examination of a young or otherwise impaired witness. Read More 1982). App. 1980); see also State v. Taylor, 669 S.W.2d 694, 698-700 (Tenn. Crim. Furthermore, there was no reversible error, if any, in failing to sustain the Defendant's objections since prejudice is not clearly shown. He told McGaha that he had been drunk and partying the night of the murder. The trial court responded by pointing out that the defense team, consisting of attorneys Carl Ogle, Jr., Stephen Ward, and an investigator, had "had the statements overnight." Defense counsel repeatedly asked to approach the bench prior to the testimony of certain State's witnesses to present motions in limine objecting to the admission of matters that might potentially come out during the witnesses' testimony. The Defendant, Gary June Caughron, appeals directly to this Court his conviction of first degree premeditated murder and the sentence of death imposed by the jury, and his convictions of first degree burglary, and assault with intent to commit rape. The majority "emphasize[s] that this case does not involve the denial of Rule 26.2 statements." Supreme Court of Tennessee, at Knoxville. We find no error with regard to the trial court's refusal to instruct the jurors that they should presume that the sentence they assess will actually be carried out that if a life sentence is imposed, a life sentence will be served and, likewise, that if the death penalty is assessed, the Defendant will be executed. The record reveals, however, that the court was in the habit of telling the jurors that they did not have to look at potentially distasteful physical evidence, such as the cloth that had bound the victim, when it was passed to them. We find no error, although the relevance of this evidence is marginal. See Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 154, 92 S. Ct. 763, 766, 31 L. Ed.