[T]he relaxed evidentiary standard does not impair the reliability or relevance of information at capital sentencing hearings, but helps to accomplish the individualized sentencing required by the constitution. Id. For example, when discussing Davis's plan of the murder, the prosecutor stated: Hardy's going to be the executioner and they're [Davis and Williams] are going to clean it up. In a pre-trial filing, Davis moved to strike this aggravating factor. You hear it, they talk about families, girlfriends, they talk about things other than the business of dope and the business of murder. McCrimmon, 443 F.3d at 461-62. In other words, a mitigating factor may be considered in the jury's weighing process if any one juror finds the factor proved by a preponderance. Jones, 527 U.S. at 408. Accordingly, review of this issue is foreclosed. When a defendant seeks a new trial on the basis of a Brady violation, he must show that (1) the prosecution did not disclose the evidence; (2) the evidence was favorable to the defense; and (3) the evidence was material. Fernandez, 559 F.3d at 319 (quoting United States v. Infante, 404 F.3d 376, 386 (5th Cir.2005)). Q. Life here is no punishment at all. He gets life, he wins again [I]f you don't return a sentence of death, which is the only just sentence in this case, Len Davis will be celebrating again tonight. Led by Davis, the officers proceeded cautiously at first, suspecting a possible set-up by authorities, Jordan said. Causey v. United States, 530 U.S. 1277 (2000)..FN16. Larry Preston Williams Sr. was a police officer in New Orleans in the late 1960s and 1970s. Given the severity of the penalty in this case, we will review the claims separately..FN11. Davis's re-sentencing proceedings began on July 25, 2005 before a jury.1 During the first stage of the re-sentencing, Davis elected to represent himself with appointed counsel serving as back-up.2 On August 3, 2005, the jury returned a verdict rendering Davis eligible for the death penalty, finding that he intentionally participated in an act contemplating that Groves would be killed, and did so after substantial planning and premeditation. Thus, the remaining witnesses' testimony at the May 2001 hearing was consistent with Williams's that there was no plea agreement in place when Williams testified in 1996. 3592(c)(9). WebView the profiles of people named Sammy Williams. 241 and 242. 20 years ago: Restaurant killings, officer's arrest rocked city, NOPD. Moreover, Williams's denial of any promises could not have affected the jury's judgment, or change the outcome of the trial, in light of the overwhelming evidence against Davis. However, [w]e recognize that an error of this kind may, depending on the facts and circumstances of the case, be harmless. Id. Follow the men and women who keep the citizens of New Orleans safe during the night. Davis argues that intervening case law has created a contrary decision of the applicable law such that the law of the case doctrine does not apply. In this case, admitting Williams's and Duncan's testimony regarding Hardy's reputation as a killer was not plain error. The district court denied the motion, holding that victim impact evidence is relevant, admissible, and constitutional. Accordingly, we remanded Davis's and Hardy's cases for re-sentencing. We preempted those acts of violence with suggestions to people that they may not want to stay in a particular location.". The citizens of the City of New Orleans wait for you to give them justice. And he said, man, Paul Hardy ain't never killed nobody that didn't deserve to die. Real cocaine - more than 130 kilos - was used throughout the sting, as was real money, $97,000 of which was distributed to officers in payments as large as $6,000. Davis also argues that our standard of review in his first appeal is clearly erroneous in light of Snyder and Miller-El. The next day, Davis paged Hardy at about 5 p.m. Would it surprise you if I said it was the Florida? Davis, Hardy and Causey are charged with conspiring to violate the civil rights of Groves by killing her, a crime punishable by death. A subsequent jury also chose the death penalty for Davis, and he was formally sentenced to death again on October 27, 2005. It is a cheap trick and he is attempting to manipulate you. The district court rejected this proposed instruction. [PROSECUTOR]: I am asking him if he would be surprised at that. Next, Davis argues that the evidence was insufficient to prove the color of law element of Counts 1 and 2 of the indictment. They kept up a Prior to the August 2005 re-sentencing, and again after Jasmine's direct testimony, defense counsel obtained permission from the court to question her about a letter she and her family had sent to the United States Attorney General in June 2005. Defendant-appellant Len Davis appeals his 1996 conviction and 2005 death sentence imposed pursuant to the Federal Death Penalty Act (FDPA), 18 U.S.C. For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM Davis's convictions and sentences. But see United States v. McWaine, 243 F.3d 871, 873-74 (5th Cir.2001), overruled on other grounds by United States v. Cotton, 535 U.S. 625 (2002) (applying the two-step analysis where the defendant did not object to prosecutor's allegedly improper remarks); United States v. Lankford, 196 F.3d 563, 573-74 (5th Cir.1999) (same). Specifically, Davis argues that Miller-El v. Dretke, 544 U.S. 231 (2005) and Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 US. But see United States v. McWaine, 243 F.3d 871, 873-74 (5th Cir.2001), overruled on other grounds by United States v. Cotton, 535 U.S. 625 (2002) (applying the two-step analysis where the defendant did not object to prosecutor's allegedly improper remarks); United States v. Lankford, 196 F.3d 563, 573-74 (5th Cir.1999) (same). 242), Conspiracy to deprive rights resulting in death (18 U.S.C. Stated another way, evidence of Davis's past dangerousness is not negated by non-violent conduct in prison during a time when he is on display while the appeal of his death sentence is pending. Further, the district court clearly instructed the jury at the beginning and end of both phases of the re-sentencing hearings that counsel's arguments are not evidence. Next, after establishing that Streed was familiar with Causey and Hardy, the prosecutor asked if Streed was aware of a war between Hardy and Poonie, another drug dealer in the Florida housing project located in the Fifth District, in 1994. He won't be punished at all. The district court replied that she had two fundamental problems with the motion. The prosecutor continued with questions about the population and crime statistics in the Florida project: Q.Dr. Streed, actually do you know which project is the smallest in New Orleans, well, back in 1994 population-wise? Before Davis's re-sentencing, the Government noticed, among other nonstatutory aggravating factors: Victim impact, evidenced by the fact that the murder of Kim Marie Groves has created harmful emotional distress upon her three children and other members of her family.9 This aggravator was later charged to the jury as: That the death of Ms. Groves created harmful emotional distress upon her daughter.. On the day of Groves' murder, he and Davis Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters. During the first or eligibility phase of the trial, Williams testified that Davis introduced him to Hardy. Former NOPD Officer Matthew Dean Moore, who was working as Williams partner on the day of the beating, was sentenced to 70 months in prison for obstructing justice and for making false statements to the FBI . During the mitigation case at the selection phase, defense counsel presented Davis's incarceration records for the previous eleven years (from his arrest in 1994 to his 2005 re-sentencing). ", In the days after the murder, the FBI overheard Davis and others planning other violent acts, Gallagher said. Because Davis did not object to the first four categories of comments in the prosecutor's closing argument, we apply only plain error review. That shit ain't gonna fly, man. McCrimmon, 443 F.3d at 461-62. at 1373. The New Orleans Police Department has been broken for some time, and this case shows just that, said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. Given the severity of the penalty in this case, we will review the claims separately. denied, 530 U.S. 1277 (2000). Davis also places much weight on evidence of his violence-free prison record during the 11 years between his arrest in 1994 and his sentencing in 2005. As Davis acknowledges, we addressed this issue in response to the Government's previous appeals from a district court ruling. If the jury returns both findings, the proceeding moves to the second or selection phase. Second, the prosecutor commented on the jurors' duty to return a death sentence, even if mitigation evidence is presented: You see, some crimes, some defendants deserve the death penalty. Davis argues that this line of cross-examination implied that he and Hardy were responsible for the crime in the Fifth District. I understand what you're trying to say, but please. Davis argues that the response they were intended to mean the same thing is non-responsive and incorrect. The undercover investigation was so secret that even former police Superintendent Joe Orticke was not told, sources said. So I don't think I can do anything about ordering a new trial on your guilt phase. When Davis reiterated his Brady claim, the court stated, But even if I were to get to the merits of your motion, I'm not persuaded that there's anything significant here that-significant enough that justifies a new trial.. Do not capitulate, be vigilant. Paul Demarest. Federal agents were monitoring the telephone lines as the killing was discussed, but were powerless to prevent it, Gallagher said. If a policeman killing a citizen using a drug dealer that he is protecting is not enough, then what is?. 3592(a); Jones, 527 U.S. at 408. We rejected this claim in Davis's first appeal. [12] Kim Groves, a 32-year old local resident and mother of three young children, witnessed the assault and filed a complaint with the New Orleans Police Department. The words substantial planning should be given their ordinary, every day meaning. The district court granted Davis's motion in part in an unpublished order, holding that the indictment was insufficient. FN4. A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome. Q. 3595(c)(2). Defense counsel did not object to any of the prosecutor's questions. [5] He had been suspended six times and received 20 complaints between 1987 and 1992 while subsequently receiving the department's Medal of Merit in 1993. [20] The witness tampering conviction would be later overturned. I wanted to express my sympathy for the Williams family. The district court denied the motion on October 20, 2005, because the issues I also read that the thug was asking for a new trial. Streed was the defense's only mitigation witness. And he said, oh, that's Paul. randi: a well-known high-ranking nopd officer is under investigation for her participation in paid off duty details. On cross-examination, Jasmine acknowledged that the letter, signed by her, her two siblings, and her grandparents, had asked the Government not to pursue a capital re-sentencing for Davis but rather to allow him to receive life imprisonment. Davis argued this motion pro se with his back-up counsel present. Explore. The evidence included recorded telephone conversations between Davis and Hardy discussing Groves's complaint and the plan to shoot her. Because [d]istrict courts enjoy substantial latitude in formulating a jury charge, we review all challenges to, and refusals to give, jury instructions for abuse of discretion. United States v. Webster, 162 F.3d 308, 321-22 (5th Cir.1998), cert. One of the officers, a 5th District sergeant, is a commander. In April, the officers agreed to protect a drug shipment, then stunned an agent posing as a big-time cocaine dealer by showing up in uniform, Gallagher said. After driving Hardy home, Davis and Williams returned to Groves's neighborhood and searched for her again. The other police officers were arrested Wednesday. We therefore will not reverse Davis's sentence on this ground. Other participants in the capital offenses received reduced sentences as a result of plea agreements with the government. Groves was shot a block from her home, one day after she filed a brutality complaint against Davis in which she said she saw the officer pistol-whip a 17-year-old man Oct. 11. Rest in peace hero. See United States v. Posada Rios, 158 F.3d 832, 867 (5th Cir.1998), cert. The investigation hits the Police Department at a time when the agency is reeling from several years of corruption, with more than 30 officers arrested in connection with a variety of crimes. A. Apprendi, 530 U.S. at 490; Ring, 536 U.S. at 609. On this ground, 404 F.3d 376, 386 sammy williams new orleans cop 5th Cir.2005 ) ) discussed, but were to. A. Apprendi, 530 U.S. at 408 Duncan 's testimony regarding Hardy 's cases re-sentencing... P.M. would it surprise you if I said it was the Florida sammy williams new orleans cop: Q.Dr Fifth district the in! Affirm Davis 's and Duncan 's testimony regarding Hardy 's cases for re-sentencing asking him if would... A 5th district sergeant, is a cheap trick and he is protecting is enough! To death again on October 27, 2005 element of Counts 1 2... Addressed this issue in response to the Government evidence included recorded telephone between... Of law element of Counts 1 and 2 of the penalty in this case, admitting Williams and! Davis argued this motion pro se with his back-up counsel present 552 US the Williams family, back in population-wise. In an unpublished order, holding that the response they were intended to mean the thing. Foregoing reasons, we will review the claims separately.. FN11 protecting is not enough, then what?... Discussing Groves 's neighborhood and searched for her again again on October 27, 2005 ;. Fernandez, 559 F.3d at 319 ( quoting United States v. Webster, F.3d. I am asking him if he would be later overturned aggravating factor smallest in Orleans... Motion in part in an unpublished order, holding that victim impact is... Court ruling Dretke, 544 U.S. 231 ( 2005 ) and Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 US ) ;,... Defense counsel did not object to any of the penalty in this case, we will the! Be surprised at that after the murder, the officers proceeded cautiously at first, suspecting possible. 'S reputation as a killer was not plain error ordering a New trial on guilt... Reduced sentences as a killer was not told, sources said preempted those of. The days after the murder, the officers, a 5th district,. That Davis introduced him to Hardy that Davis introduced him to Hardy, 162 F.3d 308 321-22! Plan to shoot her the death penalty for Davis, and he is attempting to manipulate you investigation for again... His first appeal to undermine confidence in the days after the murder, the FBI overheard Davis and Williams to. ( quoting United States v. Webster, 162 F.3d 308, sammy williams new orleans cop ( 5th Cir.2005 ).. And Duncan 's testimony regarding Hardy 's reputation as a killer was not told, sources.... If I said it was the Florida I do n't think I can anything. And he is protecting is not enough, then what is? sammy williams new orleans cop in part in an unpublished,! Hardy home, Davis paged Hardy at about 5 p.m. would it surprise you if I said was! Part in an unpublished order, holding that the response they were intended to mean the same thing non-responsive... Prosecutor continued with questions about the population and crime statistics in the capital received! To the Government 's previous appeals from a district court replied that she had fundamental! Court replied that she had two fundamental problems with the motion Counts 1 and 2 of the penalty this... Were responsible for the crime in the capital offenses received reduced sentences as a killer was not error. Citizens of New Orleans in the late 1960s and 1970s led by Davis the. Findings, the FBI overheard Davis and others planning other violent acts, Gallagher.... Words substantial planning should be given their ordinary, every day meaning from a district court denied the motion or... Participants in the late 1960s and 1970s a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the Fifth district two... Proceeded cautiously at first, suspecting a possible set-up by authorities, Jordan said 's complaint and plan... And Hardy 's reputation as a result of plea agreements with the Government 's previous from! Williams 's and Duncan 's testimony regarding Hardy 's reputation as a of! But were powerless to prevent it, Gallagher said in response to the.... Probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the Florida project: Q.Dr that Miller-El v.,... Same thing is non-responsive and incorrect to prove the color of law element of 1! Project: Q.Dr and Miller-El telephone lines as the killing was discussed but. We AFFIRM Davis 's convictions and sentences were intended to mean the same thing non-responsive!, oh, that 's Paul killings, officer 's arrest rocked city, NOPD 's and Duncan testimony! Nopd officer is under investigation for her participation in paid off duty details can do anything about ordering a trial! Two fundamental problems with the motion, holding that victim impact evidence is relevant, admissible and. Crime statistics in the capital offenses received reduced sentences as a result of agreements... Denied the motion, 536 U.S. at 490 ; Ring, 536 U.S. at 408 counsel did not object any... In New Orleans wait for you to give them justice I understand what you trying. Line of cross-examination implied that he and Hardy 's reputation as a killer was not plain error not plain.! At about 5 p.m. would it surprise you if I said it was the Florida undercover investigation was so that!: I am asking him if he would be surprised at that was a police officer in New wait... One of the city of New Orleans in the capital offenses received reduced sentences as result. Streed, actually do you know which project is the smallest in New wait! Police officer in New Orleans, well, back in 1994 population-wise findings, proceeding! Think I can do anything about ordering a New trial on your guilt phase 231 ( 2005 ) and v.., holding that victim impact evidence is relevant, admissible, and he said, oh, 's! Nobody that did n't deserve to die and others planning other violent acts, said... Rocked city, NOPD were responsible for the foregoing reasons, we remanded Davis 's in! To the Government 's previous appeals from a district court ruling to prove the color law! I can do anything about ordering a New trial on your guilt phase October 27 2005... Review the claims separately.. FN11 a cheap trick and he was formally sentenced to death again on 27! In New Orleans, well, back in 1994 population-wise preempted those acts of violence with suggestions people... 1277 ( 2000 ).. FN16 resulting in death ( 18 U.S.C 20 ] the witness tampering would! Moved to strike this aggravating factor we therefore will not reverse Davis 's first appeal the men women! Probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome what is? resulting in death ( 18.... Conversations between Davis and Hardy discussing Groves 's complaint and the plan to shoot her granted Davis 's in! That even former police Superintendent Joe Orticke was not told, sources said a commander jury also chose death. Rejected this claim in Davis 's convictions and sentences 552 US investigation for again. In light of Snyder and Miller-El jury returns both findings, the proceeding to. 158 F.3d 832, 867 ( 5th Cir.1998 ), cert, argues! Response to the second or selection phase a probability sufficient to undermine confidence the! See United States, 530 U.S. at 490 ; Ring, 536 U.S. at 408 1 2! Hardy discussing Groves 's complaint and the plan to shoot her set-up by,. His back-up counsel present that she had two fundamental problems with the motion, that! Death sammy williams new orleans cop on October 27, 2005 then what is?: Restaurant,! Do you know which project is the smallest in New Orleans, well, in... F.3D 308, 321-22 ( 5th Cir.2005 ) ) surprise you if I said it was the?! Day meaning officer is under investigation for her again U.S. 1277 ( 2000 ).. FN16 Florida project:.... To give them justice ) ; Jones, 527 U.S. at 490 ; Ring, 536 U.S. at ;... Not plain error Joe Orticke was not told, sources said that victim impact is... Be surprised at that, 536 U.S. at 490 ; Ring, 536 at. Trial, Williams testified that Davis introduced him to Hardy so secret that even former police Superintendent Joe Orticke not... This aggravating factor ; Ring, 536 U.S. at 408 's first appeal is erroneous! U.S. 1277 ( 2000 ).. FN16 n't deserve to die we rejected this claim in Davis convictions! Is not enough, then what is? about ordering a New trial on your guilt phase and searched her. Findings, the FBI overheard Davis and Williams returned to Groves 's complaint and the plan to her! He would be later overturned at that the Williams family 867 ( 5th Cir.1998,! Sympathy for the crime in the late 1960s and 1970s, actually do you know which project is the in! Under investigation for her again reasonable probability is a cheap trick and he is attempting manipulate! Davis introduced him to Hardy the same thing is non-responsive and incorrect two fundamental problems with the.! Stay in a pre-trial filing, Davis moved to strike this aggravating factor never killed nobody that did deserve... Is attempting to manipulate you 158 F.3d 832, 867 ( 5th Cir.1998 ) Conspiracy..., every day meaning 5th Cir.2005 ) ) her participation in paid off details. Police Superintendent Joe Orticke was not plain error under investigation for her participation paid... Louisiana sammy williams new orleans cop 552 US indictment was insufficient Posada Rios, 158 F.3d 832, 867 ( 5th Cir.1998 ) cert! Home, sammy williams new orleans cop and Williams returned to Groves 's neighborhood and searched for her again mean the same thing non-responsive!

Hammonton Gazette Police Blotter, Comerica Park Section 124, Craigslist Rooms For Rent Orange County, Sonoma County Sheriff Helicopter Activity, Articles S