Davis v. State
2011 OK CR 29
| Okla. Crim. App. | 2011Background
- Davis was convicted by a jury of first degree malice murder (Count I) and three related offenses in Oklahoma County; the jury found three aggravators in Count I and recommended death for that count, with concurrent sentences for Counts II–IV.
- Appellant entered the Falls Creek Apartments with a loaded firearm and killed Marcus Smith and shot Tia Green and Chinetta Hooks after forcing entry and threatening the occupants.
- Green identified Davis as the shooter; Hooks and Smith were also shot multiple times, with Smith dead at the scene.
- Davis fled and was arrested months later; he confessed to the killings but claimed self-defense for Smith, and claimed the shootings were part of a plan related to a breakup with Green.
- The trial court denied various defense voir dire requests, admitted multiple photographs and a 911 recording, and over defense objection proceeded with the two-stage capital sentencing proceeding.
- Davis challenged the denial of for-cause removals of jurors biased against the death penalty, the denial of additional peremptory challenges, the admissibility of evidence (including the 911 recording and decedent’s juvenile history), and the propriety of mitigating instructions and Beck v. Alabama questions; the court denied relief and affirmed the conviction and death sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence for murder and shootings | Davis argues the State failed to prove malice and premeditation | State contends sufficient circumstantial evidence supported intent and malice | Sufficient evidence supports first degree murder and shootings. |
| Juror impartiality and ribbon incident | Davis claims ribbons violated fair trial and due process | Slate argued no substantial prejudice; court admonished jurors | No reversible error; no showing of prejudice warranting reversal. |
| Beck v. Alabama and lesser-included offenses | Beck requires lesser-included non-capital option if warranted | Evidence did not support lesser offenses here | Beck not violated; no prima facie evidence for heat-of-passion or resisting-criminal-attempt manslaughter. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (mitigation) | Counsel failed to present expert Social History to tie mitigation together | Strategic trial decisions supported by investigation and risk assessment; no prejudice shown | No ineffective assistance; trial strategy reasonable; no prejudice proven. |
| Prosecutorial misconduct | Cumulative missteps by prosecutor deprived fairness | Arguments were within bounds and addressed evidence | No reversible prosecutorial misconduct; no impact on fairness. |
Key Cases Cited
- Estelle v. Williams, 425 U.S. 501 (U.S. 1976) (trial in prison clothes unconstitutional)
- Holbrook v. Flynn, 475 U.S. 560 (U.S. 1986) (private actors in courtroom not automatically prejudicial)
- Carey v. Musladin, 549 U.S. 70 (U.S. 2006) (private display of victim-family may be non-state action)
- Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625 (U.S. 1980) (non-capital lesser offense instruction required if warranted by evidence)
- Witt v. United States, 469 U.S. 412 (U.S. 1985) (juror impartiality standard; deference to trial court)
- Mitchell v. State, 884 P.2d 1186 (Okla. 1994) (private-actor influence and juror impartiality standards)
- Glossip v. State, 157 P.3d 148 (Okla. 2007) (Witt standard applied to capital sentencing)
- Rojem v. State, 130 P.3d 287 (Okla. 2006) (juror replacement and cause challenges in capital cases)