Mitchell v. State
270 P.3d 160
Okla. Crim. App.2011Background
- Appellant Mitchell was convicted by jury of First Degree Murder and Child Abuse (two felonies) with consecutive sentences; death by murder and life by child abuse; two aggravating factors found: prior violent felony and heinous/cruel murder.
- Victim Charita, 20 months old, sustained extensive blunt trauma and looped bruising; medical testimony linked injuries to external trauma, not accidental fall.
- Charita’s brother Kyree showed looped bruising; doctors linked injuries to child abuse; both children were in Appellant’s care during the morning of July 23, 2000.
- Appellant gave statements to Detective Edwards after invoking counsel; the trial court initially admitted them, later addressing reinitiation and waiver under Miranda.
- At retrial, joinder of Charita and Kyree abuse counts remained, with overlapping evidence and defenses emphasizing Rogers’ possible role, and the court instructed the jury separately for each offense.
- Approximately three hours after guilty verdicts, parties reached a sentencing agreement: life without parole for murder and life with parole for child abuse, contingent on waiving rights to jury sentencing and direct appeal; trial court halted proceedings when Appellant asserted innocence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the suppression ruling on Appellant's in-custody statements was proper | Mitchell invoked counsel; statements after invocation were involuntary. | Waiver/rewaking after invocation rendered statements admissible when reinitiated by Appellant. | No abuse; reinitiation and waiver were voluntary; statements admissible. |
| Whether joinder of Kyree and Charita counts was improper and required severance | Joinder permitted under Oklahoma law due to same transaction and overlapping proof. | Prejudice from joinder to prove unrelated charges; severance required. | Joinder proper; no abuse of discretion; no prejudice shown. |
| Whether the Batson challenges were properly resolved at trial | Prosecutor used peremptory strikes affecting minority jurors; race-based. | No prima facie showing of purposeful discrimination; trial court properly deferred ruling. | No reversible Batson error; prima facie burden not shown; no remand required. |
| Whether the State’s sentencing agreement and waiver procedure were properly handled | State and defense agreed to dismiss Bill of Particulars and propose a non-death sentence; court should honor knowingly made waiver. | Court erred in halting after innocence assertion; a proper record necessary for knowing waivers of jury sentencing and appeal. | Waiver record incomplete; court erred; death sentence modified to life without parole as to first-degree murder; sentences run consecutively per agreement. |
| Whether second-stage instructions and evidence correctly limited consideration of capital punishment for non-capital offense | Victim-impact and aggravating evidence could influence sentencing for non-capital count under bifurcated trial. | Instructions distinguished sentencing procedures for capital and non-capital offenses; no improper cross-pollination. | Instructions upheld; no reversible error; no cross-stage prejudice shown. |
Key Cases Cited
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1986) (prohibits race-based peremptory challenges; three-step Batson framework)
- Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1981) (extends Miranda protection; invocation of counsel halts interrogation absent reinitiation)
- Gomez v. State, 168 P.3d 1139 (OK Crim. App. 2007) (Miranda suppression standard of review; abuse of discretion standard)
- Romano v. State, 909 P.2d 92 (OK Crim. App. 1995) (plain error review for voir dire and references to burden of proof)
- Williams v. State, 22 P.3d 702 (OK Crim. App. 2001) (bifurcated sentencing procedure for capital and non-capital offenses; limiting instructions)
- Perryman v. State, 990 P.2d 900 (OK Crim. App. 1999) (procedure when capital murder and non-capital felonies are charged; impact on severance/limitations)
- Abshier v. State, 28 P.3d 579 (OK Crim. App. 2001) (Abshier on ordinary vs unreasonable force under § 844; no plain error)
- King v. State, 553 P.2d 529 (OK Crim. App. 1976) (guilty plea procedures; forms for waivers of sentencing/appeal rights)