 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Lauderdale9/5/2003
caretaker, sent Keshonte Porter to get the victim. Keshonte testified that when she and the victim returned to the apartment, the defendant whipped the victim in the bathroom, brought the victim into the living room, lifted the victim over his head, and slammed the victim onto the floor. The defendant then splashed hot water on the victim in an attempt to revive her, put her into bed, and left the apartment. Although the defendant at first told the police that the victim had been injured by falling out of bed, he later claimed that the victim had slipped in the bathroom and hit her head against the bathtub.
Dr. Mary Taylor testified that the victim was comatose when she arrived at Vanderbilt Children's hospital and had burns on the front of her body, bruises in the middle of her back, and scratch marks around her neck. She also testified that Dr. Frederick Barr discovered a fracture at the base of the victim's skull. Dr. Suzanne Starling testified that the victim's left arm was broken and that her skull fracture could have been caused by blunt force to the head. Dr. Starling concluded that marks on the victim's neck and the fact that only the left side of the victim's brain was swollen indicated that the victim could have been strangled, and Dr. Barr also stated that the victim's brain injury could have been caused by strangulation. Dr. Charles Harlan testified for the defense that he found no evidence of strangulation, that the victim's skull fracture was consistent with the victim's head hitting an edged surface, and that the victim had not been abused. However, Dr. O.C. Smith, who performed the victim's autopsy, testified that the victim died of blunt trauma to the head and compressive force to the neck and that the skull fracture could have been caused by the back of the victim's head hitting a flat or edged surface. Drs. Starling and Smith both testified that the defendant's claim that the victim fell against the bathtub did not account for the victim's extensive injuries. The jury heard the inconsistencies and alternate theories raised by the state and the defendant and decided to accredit the state's theory of the crime. Based upon the medical testimony and Keshonte's Porter's eyewitness account of the defendant dropping the victim, the evidence is more than sufficient to support the defendant's conviction for first degree felony murder.
II. FELONY MURDER BY AGGRAVATED CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT STATUTE
The defendant makes several arguments relating to the felony murder by aggravated child abuse and neglect statute. First, he claims that the wording of the statute resulted in an indictment that did not sufficiently inform him of the charged offense. Specifically, he contends that the indictment failed to inform him of the charge because it alleged that he committed first degree murder by aggravated child abuse or aggravated child neglect, and he did not know which underlying felony to defend. Second, he claims that the statute's separating aggravated child abuse and aggravated child neglect into two separate underlying felonies causes the felony murder statute to be unconstitutionally vague. As a final and related issue, he argues that the statute resulted in his being convicted without a unanimous verdict because some jurors may have found him guilty of felony murder by aggravated child abuse while other jurors may have found him guilty of felony murder by aggravated child neglect. The state claims that the indictment provides the defendant with sufficient notice, that the felony murder by aggravated child abuse statute is not unconstitutionally vague, and that the jury's verdict was unanimous. We agree with the state.
A. Sufficiency of the Indictment
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|