90 So. 3d 197
Ala. Crim. App.2011Background
- Craft was convicted of murder for the death of Bobbie Edwards and sentenced to 60 years’ imprisonment.
- Edwards’s body was found in a well near an abandoned house in Hollywood, Alabama, with a gunshot wound to the neck supporting the murder charge.
- Ballistics tied a .380 pistol (the same caliber as the shell casing) to the victim and linked a gun to Craft through a 2000 gun brought in for testing.
- Testimony from Judith Jones—Craft’s former wife—implicated Craft and concerned communications between them during marriage.
- The State introduced Brent Wheeler’s deposition testimony to establish a chain of custody, prompting Crawford-based Confrontation Clause challenges by Craft.
- The trial court admitted various other items (bullet, cartridge casing, gun, ATF Form 4473, autopsy report) subject to multiple evidentiary objections, all reviewed on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Confrontation—Wheeler deposition preserved | Wheeler unavailable; Crawford requires deposition evidence if unavailable | Trial court did not determine Wheeler’s availability under Crawford | Claim not preserved; no reversible error found |
| Unavailability showing—good-faith efforts | State conducted good-faith efforts to produce Wheeler | State’s efforts were inadequate to ensure availability | No abuse of discretion; good-faith standard met or harmless error |
| Marital privilege—Jones’s communications | Jones’s testimony about Craft’s statements violated privilege | Communications in furtherance of crime not privileged; Browder exception applies | Privilege not applicable; testimony properly admitted under crime-fraud exception |
| Business records—ATF Form 4473 and Confrontation | Form 4473 admissible as business record; may implicate Confrontation | Testimony of maker not confronted; could violate Crawford/Melendez-Diaz | Form 4473 properly authenticated; evidence non-testimonial; no Confrontation Clause violation |
| Preindictment delay and Rule 609 impeachment | Delay prejudiced Jones’s credibility; 1994 forgery conviction relevant | Delay did not cause actual prejudice; 1994 conviction remote in time; Rule 609(b) safeguards apply | No reversible error; impeachment evidence properly limited; delay not shown to prejudice trial |
Key Cases Cited
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (U.S. 2004) (confrontation clause requires unavailable witness with prior cross-examination opportunity for testimonial statements)
- Roberts, 448 U.S. 56 (U.S. 1980) (unavailability and good-faith efforts; framework for Crawford applicability)
- Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (U.S. 1967) (harmless-error standard for constitutional errors beyond reasonable doubt)
- Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S. 250 (U.S. 2009) (testimony from forensic analysts can be testimonial; business records not automatically non-testimonial)
- State v. Browder, 486 So. 2d 504 (Ala. Crim. App. 1986) (crime-fraud exception to spouse privilege when spouses jointly participate in crime)
- United States v. Neal, 743 F.2d 1441 (10th Cir. 1984) (crime-fraud exception and admissibility of testimony where spouse participates after-the-fact in concealing crime)
- Veytia-Bravo, 603 F.2d 1187 (5th Cir. 1979) (ATF records admissible under 803(6) when trustworthy; business-records foundation sufficient)