544 S.W.3d 125
Mo. Ct. App.2017Background
- Armstrong was murdered on June 4, 1983; body found in a public alley with clothing displaced and two gunshot wounds to the head.
- DNA from a cigar discarded by White matched semen/DNA profile found in Armstrong's panties.
- Police reopened the case in 2004 using DNA profiling to narrow suspects; White's DNA matched.
- Indictment on December 27, 2007 charged White with rape in the first degree and murder; trial in 2014 with DNA and prior convictions introduced.
- White was convicted of both counts in 2014; the jury found aggravating circumstances and sentenced him to death for murder and 20 years for rape; he appeals under Kentucky law.
- The court reviews thirty-three claims of error, applying an expanded, stringent standard due to death penalty context.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of prior bad acts (KRE 404(b)) as MO evidence | White argues prior murders are improper propensity evidence | Commonwealth contends similarities establish identity via MO | Court held MO evidence admissible; not an abuse of discretion |
| DNA suppression challenge to traffic-stop seizure | DNA obtained during unlawful stop should be suppressed | Stop was supported by probable cause for speeding; pat-down lawful | Court denied suppression; stop valid, pat-down justified under Terry framework |
| Recusal/district judge impartiality | Shake should have recused due to prior representation | No mandatory basis for recusal; waiver due to timeliness | Waiver found; no mandatory disqualification; no error in denial of recusal |
| Chain of custody and admissibility of physical DNA evidence (panties, rape kit, cigar, buccal swab) | Breaks in custody undermine reliability of DNA and other evidence | Breaks affect weight, not admissibility; evidentiary foundation adequate | Court found sufficient foundation; custody gaps affect weight, not admissibility |
| Prosecutorial misconduct during guilt/penalty phases | Various closing remarks allegedly biased; prejudicial impact on guilt/penalty | Wide latitude given; statements were interpretations/balancing of evidence; isolated remarks | Most remarks not reversible; one remark about genocide found improper but not enough to render trial unfair |
Key Cases Cited
- St. Clair v. Commonwealth, 455 S.W.3d 869 (Ky. 2015) (expanded review in death cases; proportionality considerations)
- Newcomb v. Commonwealth, 410 S.W.3d 63 (Ky. 2013) (modi operandi similarities can support identity with differences)
- Clark v. Commonwealth, 223 S.W.3d 90 (Ky. 2007) (abuse of discretion standard for 404(b) rulings; sound legal principles required)
- English v. Commonwealth, 993 S.W.2d 941 (Ky. 1999) (modi operandi evidence admissibility considerations)
- Bowling v. Commonwealth, 942 S.W.2d 293 (Ky. 1997) (reliability of MO evidence when linked to pattern of conduct)
- Hunt v. Commonwealth, 304 S.W.3d 15 (Ky. 2009) (proportionality and sentencing review guidance)
- Meece v. Commonwealth, 348 S.W.3d 627 (Ky. 2011) (death penalty constitutional framework)
- KRS 532.075, - (-) (statutory framework for death penalty review)