State of Missouri v. Robert Blake Blurton, 484 S.W.3d 758

Background

Blurton was convicted of three counts of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for killings at the Luetjen home, including his aunt, uncle, and their 16-year-old granddaughter.
DNA and fingerprint evidence tied Blurton to the crime scene; voice identification linked him to a 911 recording; cell-tower data showed movement from Kansas to Cole Camp on the night of the murders.
The State presented motive regarding Blurton’s job loss, housing situation, and potential inheritance from the Luetjens; the defense presented mitigating evidence at sentencing.
During trial, issues arose over the offered lesser-included offense instruction, admissibility of cell-tower testimony and fingerprint peer-review testimony, and exclusion of certain bias/motive evidence and mistrial objections.
Three separate inadvertent displays of gruesome crime-scene photographs occurred during the trial, leading to mistrial requests which were denied.
The Missouri Supreme Court independently reviewed the death sentences for proportionality under section 665.035 and affirmed the convictions and sentences.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court should have given second-degree felony murder instruction	Blurton argues entitlement to the nested lesser offense instruction.	State contends instruction form was improper and not required to be given.	No reversible error; instruction not in proper form; not required to submit.
Admissibility of cell-tower testimony by a lay witness	Blurton claimed expert testimony was required for tower location inferences.	Cell-tower plotting was within lay understanding from records.	Admission proper; lay testimony sufficed; did not require expert testimony.
Fingerprint verification testimony	Testimony that other examiners verified identifications bolstered the witness’s conclusions (Crawford concerns).	Foundation established; objections sustained or overruled as appropriate.	Trial court did not err; objections resolved; any error was preserved or not preserved depending on the record.
Exclusion of evidence of alternative motive/opportunity (Taron's mother)	Blurton should be allowed to present that Taron’s mother had motive and opportunity.	Offer of proof would not be admissible or probative; trial court limited appropriately.	Not preserved for appeal; trial court’s ruling within discretion; exclusion not reversible.
Mistrial requests after inadvertent display of photographs	Photographs shown spontaneously could inflame jury passions and justify mistrial.	No intentional misconduct; court attempted curative measures; photographs later admitted.	No abuse of discretion; mistrial denied.

Key Cases Cited

State v. Jackson, 433 S.W.3d 390 (Mo. banc 2014) (nested lesser-included offenses; lack of obligation to submit non-nested instruction)
State v. McLaughlin, 265 S.W.3d 257 (Mo. banc 2008) (preserves prejudice analysis when lesser instruction not submitted)
State v. Hall, 982 S.W.2d 675 (Mo. banc 1998) (reaffirmed that lack of prejudice when conventional second-degree murder instruction given)
State v. Kinder, 942 S.W.2d 313 (Mo. banc 1996) (second-degree murder as lesser included; how instructions tested sufficiency)
State v. Griffin, 756 S.W.2d 475 (Mo. banc 1988) (felony murder denominated as lesser included; instructional framework)
State v. Derenzy, 89 S.W.3d 472 (Mo. banc 2002) (plain error review for incorrectly worded lesser-included instructions)
State v. Parkhurst, 845 S.W.2d 31 (Mo. banc 1992) (improper instruction form; admissibility of flawed instruction)