Stevens v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-DR-00939-SCT Linked Case(s): 2002-DR-00939-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-11-2003 Opinion Author: Easley, J. Holding: Applications for Leave to Seek Post-Conviction Relief, denied. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Death penalty post-conviction relief - Peremptory challenges - Constitutionality of death penalty - Section 99-19-101(7) - Proportionality of death sentence - Evidence of diminished capacity - Limiting instruction - Marital privilege - M.R.E. 504(d)(1) - Felony child abuse - Double jeopardy - Aggravating factors Judge(s) Concurring: Pittman, C.J., McRae and Smith, P.JJ., Waller, Cobb, Carlson and Graves, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Nature of the Case: PCR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-04-1999 Appealed from: Marion County Circuit Court Judge: Michael R. Eubanks Disposition: Appellant was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death. District Attorney: Claiborne McDonald Case Number: K99-0001 |
|
| Note: | Stevens' Applications for Leave to Seek Post-Conviction Relief, denied. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Benny Joe Stevens |
ROBERT M. RYAN |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JUDY T. MARTIN MARVIN L. WHITE, JR. |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Death penalty post-conviction relief - Peremptory challenges - Constitutionality of death penalty - Section 99-19-101(7) - Proportionality of death sentence - Evidence of diminished capacity - Limiting instruction - Marital privilege - M.R.E. 504(d)(1) - Felony child abuse - Double jeopardy - Aggravating factors |
| Summary of the Facts: | Benny Stevens was convicted of four counts of capital murder and sentenced to death on all four counts. The convictions and sentences were affirmed on direct appeal. Stevens has filed an application for post-conviction relief. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Peremptory challenges Stevens argues that the State improperly exercised peremptory strikes against two black veniremen and that the judge did not conduct the required Batson analysis. Because this issue was considered and rejected on direct appeal, it is now barred from consideration under the doctrine of res judicata. Issue 2: Constitutionality of death penalty statutes Stevens argues that section 99-19-101(7) improperly allows the commission of a felony to be used as an aggravating factor in determination of a death sentence, thereby lowering the level of culpability required to impose a death sentence and that the capital sentencing scheme violates the Eighth Amendment because it potentially might allow one who merely participates in a felony to receive the death sentence for a killing he had no intent to commit. A sentencing scheme which permits imposition of the death penalty for certain felony murders without a finding of a specific intent to kill is not violative of either the Eighth Amendment or due process protections. In addition, the "during commission of a felony" aggravating factor is not unconstitutional because other statutes prevent the sentencing body from imposing a punishment that is greater than the crime. Issue 3: Proportionality of death sentence Stevens argues that his death sentence is disproportionate to the crimes because of his mental state and allegedly diminished culpability. This issue was raised on direct appeal and dismissed without merit. Issue 4: Evidence of diminished capacity Stevens argues that the court erred in excluding a defense psychiatrist's expert testimony that Stevens possessed a diminished mental capacity at the time of the crime. Not only is diminished capacity not a defense to a criminal charge in this State, but this issue was rejected on direct appeal. Issue 5: Limiting instruction Stevens argues that the jury instruction issued in connection with the "especially heinous, atrocious and cruel" aggravating circumstance was both unconstitutionally vague and also unsupported by the evidence. This issue was considered and rejected on direct appeal. Issue 6: Marital privilege Stevens argues that it was error for the court to allow his wife to testify that he confessed to the slayings. M.R.E. 504(d)(1) contains an exception to the privilege where one spouse is charged with a crime against a minor child. Issue 7: Felony child abuse Stevens argues that a capital murder charge was not justified because there was no evidence of any separate act of child abuse apart from the actual killings. Both the burglary and the violence against the children elevated the killings by Stevens to capital murder. Issue 8: Double jeopardy Stevens argues that the use of felony child abuse and burglary charges as underlying offenses for capital murder placed him in double jeopardy of prosecution. Because the underlying offenses did not merge into the murders, the use of those underlying felonies in the indictment did not place him in double jeopardy. Issue 9: Aggravating factors Stevens argues that his death sentences must be vacated because the aggravating circumstances which charged capital murder were not included in the indictment. A defendant is not entitled to formal notice of the aggravating circumstances to be employed by the prosecution, and an indictment for capital murder puts a defendant on sufficient notice that the statutory aggravating factors will be used against him. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
