*1 RITCHIE, Appellant, Karen of Criminal 10, Murphy,
Kevin City, appellant. Ponca for Gen., Cartwright, Atty. Jan Eric Reta Strubhar, Atty. Gen., Asst. City, Oklahoma appellee. for OPINION BRETT, Presiding Judge: appellant, Ritchie, Karen Sue was tried for the crime of Murder in the Second Degree CRF-78-20, in Case No. in the Dis- Kay trict County. found appellant guilty charged and fixed punishment seventy-five (75) at years’ im- prisonment.
Early morning February (3) year three old Suzanne Ritchie arrived City at the Ponca Hospital. Despite a valiant attempt, rescue pro- the child was shortly nounced dead after her arrival. A preliminary observation of the child’s contusions, revealed numerous wounds and teeth marks. The police were summoned to investigate what was apparently a vicious attach directed at the deceased. Their in- vestigation began with the two individuals brought who had the child emergen- cy Appellant, room: Ritchie, Karen Sue mother, who was to become a co-defendant. Later that day striking admitted the de- *2 1245 hand, is picture underlying A. This a flyswat- and a ceased with her a belt boy- that further admitted her of the skin of the skull of this ter. She tissues friend, severely had person identified to me as Rit- Suzanne “punished” the Suzanne Ritchie chie.
preceding evening. appel- search Q. you photo- Are with that familiar warrant, dwelling, pursuant to a valid lant’s graph, sir? would corrobo- revealed the evidence which sir; Yes, picture. I the A. took belt, a a a flyswatter, rate her statement: T-19 and T-20 were Exhibits State’s to the plastic pipe shoestrings and used bind following by Dr. Parks in the identified Despite po- her deceased. statement manner: subsequent testimony, ap- the lice and her Q. right, showing All sir. I am now to pellant pleaded that she maintained what heretofore been marked as onslaught, you has cease brutal with Wilson to his T—20 Exhibit T-19 and and compli- Plaintiff’s gaining but was ineffectual in his sir, what you, you if can tell us those ask ance. are? assign- appellant’s The and fourth first picture is of brain of this A. One a the of as to ments error are of such nature I and is of the that one subsequent her make discussion of most of large being clots removed with its blood assignments unnecessary. ap- error The of place, which were the cause death. in pellant that admission of cer- complains the photographic tain was reversible evidence into The admission unduly in inflamed error that said evidence held within the generally is to fall evidence jurors. impassioned and the President v. of the trial court. discretion the controversy primarily focuses State, (Okl.Cr.1979). 222 Never 602 P.2d Exhibits introduction of State’s T— theless, developed a clear this has T—19 and is an T—20. Exhibit T-6 reviewing of a propriety in the standard deceased, ap- photograph of the she Where that discretion. given exercise of photograph peared to death. This to inflame tends demonstrative evidence Unfortunately, was included in the record. fact, that such justice requires the trier in the record all exhibits were included v. Koonce probative have value. evidence However, the to this transmitted Court. (Okl.Cr.1969); State, Oxendine Stephen Dr. testimony of witness State’s (Okl.Cr.1958). State, To 940 355 P.2d v. Parks, provide pathologist, a forensic does sought which is that have what an account of the absent issue. Bre must be at be established to depicted. The Exhibit Doctor described State, (Okl.Cr.1956). P.2d v. 572 561 shears T-18 as follows: Moreover, relevancy the is not test. mere doctor, Q. Now, you first when make proba Rather, both the evidence is where area, the entry to cranial yield must prejudicial, the former tive and through? surgical process you go that State, su President greater value. Well, A. I make an incision from behind supra. pra; Oxendine ear, right one other ear to behind the Oxendine, supra, at head, through top over the and language: recited in clear hair, hair, parts make this inci- her then back on each pull sion. Then the skin was not the handiwork autopsy [T]he side, exam- you could, can at that time cir- also under the defendant underlying ine the tissues beneath than cumstances, purpose softer no serve other skin, overlying skull. emotions to pho- that jury. This Court feels Q. showing what has here- you I am in the form wholly inadmissible Plaintiff’s Exhibit tos tofore been marked as was an will, their admission us, you you presented T-18 if and ask to tell court’s discretion. of the trial abuse what that is? an notwithstanding Oxendine consisted of those item of evidence showing fact that it was never introduced into evi- nude of the deceased with the sutured only purpose dence. The the billboard pathologist. incisions made continuously prej- could have served was to were, doubt, instant no *3 jury throughout udice the the trial. prejudicial they even more because showed Therefore, considering after the briefs the brain and the deceased transcript testimony and because of child. The were inadmissible. The by admitting preju- the abuse of discretion pathologist concerning testified the nature record, autopsy photos dicial into the injuries cause death. Con- Court concludes that this conviction must sequently, we fail to see how Exhibits be reversed and remanded. T-20, possessed any probative T-19 and passions other than to arouse the CORNISH, J., concurs. prejudices of jury. BUSSEY, J., specially concurs. error, assignment her fourth appellant complains of the admission of an BUSSEY, Judge, specially concurs: enlarged photograph of the deceased child While I concur that this case must be taken some prior time to the incident for reversed and remanded of the in- because which the photo was tried. The troduction photographs autop- of the graph was taken from appel billfold sy, I do deem the introduction of the lant enlarged and was by to ten inches photographs of prior the victim to her fourteen inches displayed and was on a death, errors, prejudi- absent other so to be display board the trial. With cial as to warrant a modification or rever- witnesses, each of prosecutor several sal. proceeded to refer photo to the various graphs for the jury. benefit of the
jury should not have been concerned with the child looked like to the of her,
fense against committed but instead it
should have only been concerned with what done, been done to the how it was
when it was done and who did it. Hudman 89 Okl.Cr. (1949). value of enlarged SOWDER, Appellant, John Kawaii photo questionable highly and could be prejudicial. appeal, a close such a photograph may tip well scales appellant’s favor. Coupled with the use of the Court of Criminal
photo, the use of a display billboard to numerous could have served no other purpose prejudice other than to of the jury. The ar-
rangement of was such as keep constantly in presence horrifying nature of the offense.
The enlarged photo was surrounded fif- photos,
teen some of which showed damaged body, and the three (T-18, T-19 and
T-20), placed below enlarged pho-
tograph. sense, In a the billboard became