Dodd v. Trammell, 753 F.3d 971

Dodd was convicted in Oklahoma state court of two counts of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the 1994 murders of Shane McInturff and Keri Sloniker.
The prosecution’s case was circumstantial; there were no eyewitnesses, confessions, or physical evidence tying Dodd to the killings.
At § 2254 review, the district court denied relief on all claims but granted a COA on two issues: insufficiency of evidence and improper victim-impact testimony.
The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals (OCCA) affirmed most claims; this court reviews the OCCA’s application of Jackson v. Virginia for reasonableness under AEDPA.
On retrial, the jury again found Dodd guilty of two murders and sentenced him to death on both counts after finding two aggravating factors.
The court reverses the death-sentence aspect related to victim-impact testimony and remands with instructions to grant relief on the sentences, subject to resentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Insufficiency of the evidence	Dodd argues the evidence fails to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.	State argues the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, supports guilt.	OCCA reasonable; insufficiency denial affirmed.
Admission of third-party-culprit evidence	Dodd contends excluding third-party evidence violated a right to present a complete defense.	Dodd asserts the evidence pointed to another culprit and should have been admitted.	OCCA’s ruling not contrary to clearly established federal law; exclusion permissible.
Prosecutorial misconduct	Prosecutor engaged in conduct warranting reversal (closing argument, vouching, improper comments).	State defends prosecutorial remarks as proper commentary on the evidence.	Most misconduct claims not reversible; some remarks deemed not to deprive due process; overall denial sustained except as to victim-impact evidence.
Victim-impact testimony at sentencing	Allowing relatives to recommend death violates the Eighth Amendment.	Oklahoma law permits such testimony and recommendations during sentencing.	The admission violated the Eighth Amendment; not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt; relief granted remanding for resentencing.

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency of evidence standard for due process)
Crane v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 683 (U.S. 1986) (complete defense and admissibility of defense evidence)
Washington v. Texas, 388 U.S. 14 (U.S. 1967) (accomplice testimony exclusion as irrational)
Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284 (U.S. 1973) (unreliability/availability of testimony and cross-examination)
Rock v. Arkansas, 483 U.S. 44 (U.S. 1987) (hypnotically refreshed testimony reliability)
Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808 (U.S. 1991) (victim-impact testimony limitations after Booth)
Booth v. Maryland, 482 U.S. 496 (U.S. 1987) (victim-impact statements in sentencing phase)
Paxton v. Ward, 199 F.3d 1197 (10th Cir. 1999) (fundamental fairness and evidentiary rules)
Lockett v. Trammell, 711 F.3d 1218 (10th Cir. 2013) (victim-impact testimony and death penalty considerations)
Lott v. Trammell, 705 F.3d 1167 (10th Cir. 2013) (harmlessness of victim-impact evidence considerations)
Selsor v. Workman, 644 F.3d 984 (10th Cir. 2011) (victim-impact testimony's admissibility and relevance)