State Of Washington, Resp-cross v. Danny Giles, App-cross
196 Wash. App. 745
Wash. Ct. App.2016Background
- Patti Berry, a nightclub dancer, disappeared July 31, 1995; her blood-stained car, clothing, and belongings were recovered nearby; her body was found nine days later with multiple stab wounds.
- Years of DNA testing produced partial matches between Giles and DNA on Berry’s jeans, handbag, steering wheel, and driver’s seat headrest; Giles could not be excluded as a contributor.
- Giles was charged with first-degree murder (while armed). He sought to admit "other suspect" evidence identifying 11 alternate suspects; the trial court allowed one (Bryan Petitclerc) but excluded evidence as to Frank Colacurcio Jr., Michael Beatie, and James Leslie after multi-day hearings.
- During trial an expert (Kern) testified contrary to a motion in limine (saying it was "likely" Giles had been in the car rather than merely "consistent"). Defense objected; the court struck the testimony, gave a curative instruction (agreed to by defense counsel), and allowed requestioning consistent with the limine ruling.
- The jury convicted Giles; on appeal he argued the exclusions of other-suspect evidence and the expert’s improper testimony deprived him of his right to present a defense and a fair trial.
Issues
| Issue | Giles' Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of other-suspect evidence re: Frank Colacurcio Jr. | Colacurcio had motive/opportunity (club ownership, money owed, alleged threats, suspicious blank surveillance tape) and should be presented to jury | Proffered facts did not connect Colacurcio to the killing—too speculative and not probative of being the killer | Trial court did not abuse discretion; exclusion proper (evidence insufficiently connected) |
| Admissibility of other-suspect evidence re: Deputy Michael Beatie | Circumstantial facts (presence at scenes, scratches, suspicious comments, prior investigation) tended to link Beatie to murder | Beatie’s role as investigating deputy and lack of direct nexus made the evidence speculative; hearsay and pyramiding of inferences | Trial court did not abuse discretion; exclusion proper (lacked probative nexus; some proffers were inadmissible hearsay) |
| Admissibility of other-suspect evidence re: James Leslie | Leslie was present at club, acted suspiciously (duffel bag, burned diary, conflicting statements) | Facts showed only that Leslie was a patron; no tendency to connect him to the murder | Trial court did not abuse discretion; exclusion proper (insufficient nexus) |
| Expert testimony violating limine ("likely" vs "consistent") and need for mistrial/new trial | Expert’s testimony that it was "likely" Giles was in the car violated the court’s ruling and was prejudicial; remedial measures insufficient | Testimony was struck, a curative instruction given (defense-approved), prosecutor rephrased and court offered reopening; no mistrial requested at trial | No reversible error: remedies requested were granted; curative instruction presumed effective; no mistrial required or requested |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Downs, 168 Wash. 664 (discussing historical other-suspect exclusion where proffered evidence fails to show a nonspeculative connection)
- Holmes v. South Carolina, 547 U.S. 319 (2006) (holding a rule excluding third-party guilt evidence based on strength of prosecution’s case violates right to present a defense; focus must be on proffered evidence’s probative value)
- State v. Franklin, 180 Wn.2d 371 (explaining Washington’s restrained Downs test: circumstantial evidence admissible if an adequate nexus to the crime exists)
- State v. Maupin, 128 Wn.2d 918 (admitting eyewitness evidence linking another person to the specific crime as sufficiently probative)
- Crane v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 683 (1986) (constitutional bounds on excluding defense evidence; relevance and prejudice balancing)
- State v. Warren, 165 Wn.2d 17 (curative instructions presumed effective)