State of Tennessee v. Hubert Glenn Sexton, 2012 Tenn. LEXIS 377

Sexton was tried in Scott County for two counts of first-degree murder arising from the May 2000 killings of Stanley and Terry Goodman.
The murders occurred four days after a child-sex-abuse allegation against Sexton by his stepchild, B.G., triggered custody actions and investigations.
DCS/Bradley County and local police interviewed children in Sexton’s home; Sexton gave inconsistent statements and challenged the charges against him.
Key evidence included a .22 rifle found in Sexton’s residence, a Dollar Store receipt tying him to a pre-murder purchase, and admissions to several witnesses.
The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed guilt but reversed the death sentences, remanding for new sentencing, while this Court affirmed guilt and vacated the death sentences for new sentencing proceedings.
The opinion identifies multiple trial errors (Rule 404(b) evidence, polygraph references, prosecutorial misconduct) that affected sentencing, though guilt was overwhelmingly proven.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Change of venue correctness	Sexton contends venue was improper in Scott County.	State argued venue proper given pretrial publicity was not prejudicial.	No abuse; venue properly maintained.
Voir dire and death-penalty qualification	Striking death-penalty-opposing jurors based on written questionnaire violated constitutional rights.	Excluding death-qualified jurors was permissible to ensure impartial deliberation.	Excluding jurors solely for Question 33 inappropriate; remand for sentencing with proper voir dire.
Rule 404(b) evidence of child sex abuse	Testimony of B.G.'s allegations was probative of motive and identity.	Admitting detailed abuse testimony was unfairly prejudicial and improper.	Admission flawed; probative value did not outweigh prejudice; should have been excluded; remand for new sentencing.
Polygraph and related witness testimony	Reference to polygraph and defendant’s refusal to take it undermined fairness.	Polygraph references were not proper and violated rules.	References improper; waivable not cured; prejudicial risk; remand for sentencing.
Prosecutorial misconduct and cumulative error	Opening and closing arguments, plus several trial actions, tainted the proceedings.	Some misconduct was harmless and isolated.	Multiple instances cumulatively compromised sentencing; new sentencing hearing required.

State v. Rogers, 188 S.W.3d 593 (Tenn. 2006) (extensive voir dire and venue considerations in capital cases)
Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U.S. 719 (U.S. 1992) (concerning impartial juries and voir dire)
Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 (U.S. 1985) (death-qualification standards for jurors)
Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 (U.S. 1968) (extremes must be eliminated from juror pool in capital cases)
State v. Parton, 694 S.W.2d 299 (Tenn. 1985) (foundational Rule 404(b) principles in Tennessee)
State v. DuBose, 953 S.W.2d 649 (Tenn. 1997) ( Rule 404(b) evidentiary standards and balancing prejudice)