BAIRD v. STATE
2017 OK CR 16
| Okla. Crim. App. | 2017Background
- David Lee Baird was tried and convicted of first-degree murder, unlawful desecration of a dead body, forging a certificate of title, and obtaining food stamps by fraud; jury recommended life without parole for murder and concurrent/consecutive terms for other counts.
- Victim Claudine Marroquin went missing after an August 24, 2013 domestic dispute; her body was found two weeks later in a shallow backyard grave, wrapped in plastic with evidence indicating smothering.
- Police executed a search of the marital home; items linked to the burial (shovel, matching labels, plastic bags, cords) and weapons were found; Claudine’s food stamp card and a forged vehicle title were tied to Baird.
- Baird’s first trial ended in a mistrial after the State failed to file the search warrant and return; defense counsel (over Baird’s personal objection) requested mistrial.
- On retrial the jury convicted Baird; he appealed raising double jeopardy (mistrial), costs tied to the mistrial, denial of self‑defense instruction/sufficiency on malice, insufficiency on forgery and food-stamp fraud, admission of weapons evidence, excessive sentence, and cumulative error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Baird) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Double jeopardy after mistrial | Retrial permissible because defense counsel requested mistrial (a tactical decision) and prosecutors did not intentionally "goad" defendant. | Mistrial was effectively granted over Baird’s objection, so retrial barred absent manifest necessity. | Counsel’s tactical motion binds defendant; no evidence the State intended to goad; retrial not barred. |
| Assessment of court costs/fees tied to mistrial | Costs are part of criminal penalty for convictions; mistrial was part of the same prosecution so costs are proper. | Costs/fees attributable to the aborted trial portion should be disallowed. | No plain error; costs lawful under 28 O.S. §101 because defendant convicted in same case. |
| Self-defense instruction / malice sufficiency | No instruction required because evidence did not support self-defense; State need not disprove it when unsupported. | Trial court abused discretion by refusing self-defense instruction; State failed to disprove self-defense and malice beyond a reasonable doubt. | Waived by briefing rules; on merits, evidence insufficient to support self-defense and sufficient for malice. |
| Admission of weapons/photos (other‑acts evidence) | Weapons/photos were part of the res gestae and relevant to possible cause of death; probative value outweighed prejudice. | Evidence of unrelated weapons was improper other‑crimes evidence and unduly prejudicial. | Admission not an abuse of discretion: res gestae exception applied and relevance to cause of death supported admission. |
Key Cases Cited
- Oregon v. Kennedy, 456 U.S. 667 (U.S. 1982) (retrial barred where government conduct was intended to "goad" defendant into requesting mistrial)
- United States v. Burke, 257 F.3d 1321 (11th Cir. 2001) (decision to seek mistrial is tactical and binds defendant)
- United States v. Chapman, 593 F.3d 365 (4th Cir. 2010) (mistrial decisions are counsel’s tactical choices)
- United States v. Washington, 198 F.3d 721 (8th Cir. 1999) (mistrial requests involve strategic alternatives entrusted to counsel)
- Davis v. State, 268 P.3d 86 (Okla. Crim. App. 2011) (sufficiency standard; self-defense instruction requires supporting evidence)
- Neloms v. State, 274 P.3d 161 (Okla. Crim. App. 2012) (admission of evidence reviewed for abuse of discretion; probative vs. prejudicial balance)
- Pullen v. State, 387 P.3d 922 (Okla. 2016) (sentence within statutory range not modified absent shocking the conscience)