Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
D met Holly Ann Blake, a waitress at the diner, and eventually asked her out on a date. According to D, they began engaging in consensual sexual foreplay. At some point, Blake made a derogatory comment regarding D's anatomy. D went into a rage and strangled her to death. D admitted that it took several minutes to kill Blake and that she struggled for her life. D left the scene but returned after dark at which time he started a large fire and burned Blake's body and her belongings. Just a few days prior, a man later identified as D entered Mary Yohe's home near East Berlin, Pennsylvania. After almost choking her to death, he forced Yohe into his vehicle. Yohe's assailant then drove her to a remote area where he threatened her with a knife, tied her up, and repeatedly assaulted, raped, and sodomized her over several hours. Throughout the ordeal, Yohe begged her assailant to spare her life. Fortunately, the man relented, drove Yohe back to her home, and released her. D eventually confessed to the rape of Yohe and the murder of Blake. On April 16, 1993, a jury convicted D of the first-degree murder of Holly Ann Blake. On appeal, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals vacated D's conviction, holding that the state had failed to bring him to trial within the period required by Maryland Rule 4-271, Maryland's state law equivalent of the Speedy Trial Act. In November of 1994, D was convicted of the kidnapping and rape of Mary Yohe in the Court of Common Pleas of Adams County, Pennsylvania. He received a sentence of 35 years. On November 9, 1995, a federal grand jury returned an indictment charging D with kidnapping. P gave notice that it intended to introduce evidence at trial indicating that D had been convicted in Pennsylvania state court of kidnapping and sexually assaulting another woman, Mary Yohe, eleven days prior to his alleged kidnapping of Blake. D filed a motion in limine to exclude the Yohe evidence under Rules 403 and 404(b). The district court denied the motions. The Yohe evidence was admissible under Rule 404(b) for the limited purpose of showing D's intent. D was convicted and appealed. D contends that Yohe's testimony detailing her kidnapping and sexual assault D and Jackson's testimony recounting D's solicitation of the murder of Yohe were introduced merely to impugn his character and that the potential prejudice of the testimony substantially outweighed its probative value.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co