Bigby v. Dretke
Encyclopedia
Bigby v. Dretke 402 F.3d 551 (5th Cir. 2005), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit heard a case appealed from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
(trial court) on the issue of the instructions given to a jury
in death penalty sentencing
. The decision took into account the recent United States Supreme Court decisions concerning the relevance of mitigating evidence
in sentencing, as in Penry v. Lynaugh
.
to find Michael Trekell, with whom she lived, and their infant son dead, the deaths being homicides as determined by forensic investigators. On December 26, 1987, Fort Worth police were called to a Fort Worth motel where a police standoff
occurred. Later the defendant, James Bigby, surrendered without incident. He gave a written statement to the police confessing
to the murder
s two days later. Bigby was charged with the murder of the male victim and of drowning
the man's infant son, both of whom he knew. The mother of the murdered infant identified Bigby as being with her son just prior to his death.
At the trial, Bigby used the insanity defense with several psychiatrist
s testifying to his mental illness
. One testified that Bigby suffered from an intractable paranoid schizophrenia with paranoid delusions that prevented him from distinguishing between right and wrong, and concluded that Bigby committed the murders as a direct result of his mental illness.
During a trial recess, Bigby removed a gun
from the unoccupied bench
of the judge in the courtroom
, went to the judge's chambers and aimed the gun at the judge's head, saying "Let's go", after which Bigby was subdued by the judge. The defense made a motion for a mistrial and requested the judge's recusal
from the case. Both defense motions were denied. The judge testified in an administrative hearing that Bigby's assault
had not bias
ed him against Bigby and the trial was allowed to continue. After the defense rested its case, the judge allowed the rebuttal
by the state to introduce testimony
regarding Bigby's stealing the gun and threating the judge, portraying the incident as attempted escape, and further saying this was evidence that Bigby was conscious of his guilt
and therefore not eligible for the insanity defense.
After the conclusion of the trial, the jury rejected Bigby's insanity defense. The jury
's verdict found Bigby guilty of capital murder in a double homicide
and imposed the death penalty.
stating that the trial court erred in giving the jury unconstitutional instructions, in violation of the United States Supreme Court's decision in Penry v. Lynaugh
, 492 U.S. 302 (1989). In Penry v. Lynaugh, the issue was the instructions given to the jury—the jury was instructed
to address the issues of whether the death of the victim was deliberate, whether there was probability that the defendant would constitute a continued threat to society, and whether the conduct was an unreasonable response to provocation by the victim. In Penry v. Lynaugh the Supreme Court decided that the defendant's Eighth Amendment
rights were violated because the three issues the jury was instructed to consider were not broad enough for the jury to weight the effect of mitigating evidence
. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, despite almost identical jury instructions given at the sentencing phase of Bigby's trial, affirmed both the conviction
and sentence
.
After several subsequent denials of appeal
and a denial of a writ of habeas corpus by the trial court, Bigby appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
, which granted a certificate of appeal to examine Bigby's claim of denial of the right to a trial presided over by a fair and impartial judge and other claims, including the complaints of inadequate instructions to the jury as outlined in Penry v. Lynaugh.
overturned the district court, granted a certificate of appeal, vacated Bigby's sentence, and remanded the case to the district court with instructions to grant habeas corpus
relief.
Thus the court struck down jury instructions
in death penalty cases that do not ask about mitigating factor
s including a consideration of the defendant
's social, medical, and psychological history, saying that the jury must be instructed to consider mitigating factors even when answering unrelated questions. This ruling suggests that an expanded explanation including these factors be given in the jury instructions to insure the jury weighs all the mitigating factors.
This ruling also established that a defendant's mental disorder must be considered as a mitigating factor in sentencing in a death penalty case, even if mental illness was not brought up in the trial.
United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
The United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas is a United States district court. Its first judge, Andrew Phelps McCormick, was appointed to the court on April 10, 1879. The court convenes in Dallas, Texas with divisions in Fort Worth, Amarillo, Abilene, Lubbock, San Angelo...
(trial court) on the issue of the instructions given to a jury
Jury instructions
Jury instructions are the set of legal rules that jurors should follow when the jury is deciding a civil or criminal case. Jury instructions are given to the jury by the jury instructor, who usually reads them aloud to the jury...
in death penalty sentencing
Sentence (law)
In law, a sentence forms the final explicit act of a judge-ruled process, and also the symbolic principal act connected to his function. The sentence can generally involve a decree of imprisonment, a fine and/or other punishments against a defendant convicted of a crime...
. The decision took into account the recent United States Supreme Court decisions concerning the relevance of mitigating evidence
Mitigating factor
A mitigating factor, in law, is any information or evidence presented to the court regarding the defendant or the circumstances of the crime that might result in reduced charges or a lesser sentence.-Death penalty in the United States:...
in sentencing, as in Penry v. Lynaugh
Penry v. Lynaugh
Penry v. Lynaugh, , sanctioned the death penalty for mentally retarded offenders because the Court determined executing the mentally retarded was not "cruel and unusual punishment" under the Eighth Amendment...
.
Facts of the case
On December 24, 1987, Grace Kehler returned home in Fort Worth, TexasTexas
Texas is the second largest U.S. state by both area and population, and the largest state by area in the contiguous United States.The name, based on the Caddo word "Tejas" meaning "friends" or "allies", was applied by the Spanish to the Caddo themselves and to the region of their settlement in...
to find Michael Trekell, with whom she lived, and their infant son dead, the deaths being homicides as determined by forensic investigators. On December 26, 1987, Fort Worth police were called to a Fort Worth motel where a police standoff
Impasse
A bargaining impasse occurs when the two sides negotiating an agreement are unable to reach an agreement and become deadlocked. An impasse is almost invariably mutually harmful, either as a result of direct action which may be taken such as a strike in employment negotiation or sanctions/military...
occurred. Later the defendant, James Bigby, surrendered without incident. He gave a written statement to the police confessing
Confession (legal)
In the law of criminal evidence, a confession is a statement by a suspect in crime which is adverse to that person. Some authorities, such as Black's Law Dictionary, define a confession in more narrow terms, e.g...
to the murder
Murder
Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human being, and generally this state of mind distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide...
s two days later. Bigby was charged with the murder of the male victim and of drowning
Drowning
Drowning is death from asphyxia due to suffocation caused by water entering the lungs and preventing the absorption of oxygen leading to cerebral hypoxia....
the man's infant son, both of whom he knew. The mother of the murdered infant identified Bigby as being with her son just prior to his death.
At the trial, Bigby used the insanity defense with several psychiatrist
Psychiatrist
A psychiatrist is a physician who specializes in the diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders. All psychiatrists are trained in diagnostic evaluation and in psychotherapy...
s testifying to his mental illness
Mental illness
A mental disorder or mental illness is a psychological or behavioral pattern generally associated with subjective distress or disability that occurs in an individual, and which is not a part of normal development or culture. Such a disorder may consist of a combination of affective, behavioural,...
. One testified that Bigby suffered from an intractable paranoid schizophrenia with paranoid delusions that prevented him from distinguishing between right and wrong, and concluded that Bigby committed the murders as a direct result of his mental illness.
During a trial recess, Bigby removed a gun
Gun
A gun is a muzzle or breech-loaded projectile-firing weapon. There are various definitions depending on the nation and branch of service. A "gun" may be distinguished from other firearms in being a crew-served weapon such as a howitzer or mortar, as opposed to a small arm like a rifle or pistol,...
from the unoccupied bench
Bench (metonymy)
Bench can be used as a metonym for a group of people associated with sitting on particular benches. The words chair, seat and desk can be used in similar ways....
of the judge in the courtroom
Courtroom
A courtroom is the actual enclosed space in which a judge regularly holds court.The schedule of official court proceedings is called a docket; the term is also synonymous with a court's caseload as a whole.-Courtroom design:-United States:...
, went to the judge's chambers and aimed the gun at the judge's head, saying "Let's go", after which Bigby was subdued by the judge. The defense made a motion for a mistrial and requested the judge's recusal
Recusal
Judicial disqualification, also referred to as recusal, refers to the act of abstaining from participation in an official action such as a legal proceeding due to a conflict of interest of the presiding court official or administrative officer. Applicable statutes or canons of ethics may provide...
from the case. Both defense motions were denied. The judge testified in an administrative hearing that Bigby's assault
Assault
In law, assault is a crime causing a victim to fear violence. The term is often confused with battery, which involves physical contact. The specific meaning of assault varies between countries, but can refer to an act that causes another to apprehend immediate and personal violence, or in the more...
had not bias
Bias
Bias is an inclination to present or hold a partial perspective at the expense of alternatives. Bias can come in many forms.-In judgement and decision making:...
ed him against Bigby and the trial was allowed to continue. After the defense rested its case, the judge allowed the rebuttal
Rebuttal
In law, rebuttal is a form of evidence that is presented to contradict or nullify other evidence that has been presented by an adverse party. By analogy the same term is used in politics and public affairs to refer to the informal process by which statements, designed to refute or negate specific...
by the state to introduce testimony
Testimony
In law and in religion, testimony is a solemn attestation as to the truth of a matter. All testimonies should be well thought out and truthful. It was the custom in Ancient Rome for the men to place their right hand on a Bible when taking an oath...
regarding Bigby's stealing the gun and threating the judge, portraying the incident as attempted escape, and further saying this was evidence that Bigby was conscious of his guilt
Guilt
Guilt is the state of being responsible for the commission of an offense. It is also a cognitive or an emotional experience that occurs when a person realizes or believes—accurately or not—that he or she has violated a moral standard, and bears significant responsibility for that...
and therefore not eligible for the insanity defense.
After the conclusion of the trial, the jury rejected Bigby's insanity defense. The jury
Jury
A jury is a sworn body of people convened to render an impartial verdict officially submitted to them by a court, or to set a penalty or judgment. Modern juries tend to be found in courts to ascertain the guilt, or lack thereof, in a crime. In Anglophone jurisdictions, the verdict may be guilty,...
's verdict found Bigby guilty of capital murder in a double homicide
Homicide
Homicide refers to the act of a human killing another human. Murder, for example, is a type of homicide. It can also describe a person who has committed such an act, though this use is rare in modern English...
and imposed the death penalty.
Appeals
Bigby's direct appeal to the Texas Court of Criminal AppealsTexas Court of Criminal Appeals
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is the court of last resort for all criminal matters in the State of Texas, United States. The Court, which is based in the Supreme Court Building in Downtown Austin, is composed of a Presiding Judge and eight judges....
stating that the trial court erred in giving the jury unconstitutional instructions, in violation of the United States Supreme Court's decision in Penry v. Lynaugh
Penry v. Lynaugh
Penry v. Lynaugh, , sanctioned the death penalty for mentally retarded offenders because the Court determined executing the mentally retarded was not "cruel and unusual punishment" under the Eighth Amendment...
, 492 U.S. 302 (1989). In Penry v. Lynaugh, the issue was the instructions given to the jury—the jury was instructed
Jury instructions
Jury instructions are the set of legal rules that jurors should follow when the jury is deciding a civil or criminal case. Jury instructions are given to the jury by the jury instructor, who usually reads them aloud to the jury...
to address the issues of whether the death of the victim was deliberate, whether there was probability that the defendant would constitute a continued threat to society, and whether the conduct was an unreasonable response to provocation by the victim. In Penry v. Lynaugh the Supreme Court decided that the defendant's Eighth Amendment
Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights which prohibits the federal government from imposing excessive bail, excessive fines or cruel and unusual punishments. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that this amendment's Cruel and Unusual...
rights were violated because the three issues the jury was instructed to consider were not broad enough for the jury to weight the effect of mitigating evidence
Mitigating factor
A mitigating factor, in law, is any information or evidence presented to the court regarding the defendant or the circumstances of the crime that might result in reduced charges or a lesser sentence.-Death penalty in the United States:...
. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, despite almost identical jury instructions given at the sentencing phase of Bigby's trial, affirmed both the conviction
Conviction
In law, a conviction is the verdict that results when a court of law finds a defendant guilty of a crime.The opposite of a conviction is an acquittal . In Scotland and in the Netherlands, there can also be a verdict of "not proven", which counts as an acquittal...
and sentence
Sentence (law)
In law, a sentence forms the final explicit act of a judge-ruled process, and also the symbolic principal act connected to his function. The sentence can generally involve a decree of imprisonment, a fine and/or other punishments against a defendant convicted of a crime...
.
After several subsequent denials of appeal
Appeal
An appeal is a petition for review of a case that has been decided by a court of law. The petition is made to a higher court for the purpose of overturning the lower court's decision....
and a denial of a writ of habeas corpus by the trial court, Bigby appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:* Eastern District of Louisiana* Middle District of Louisiana...
, which granted a certificate of appeal to examine Bigby's claim of denial of the right to a trial presided over by a fair and impartial judge and other claims, including the complaints of inadequate instructions to the jury as outlined in Penry v. Lynaugh.
Decision
On March 8, 2005, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth CircuitUnited States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:* Eastern District of Louisiana* Middle District of Louisiana...
overturned the district court, granted a certificate of appeal, vacated Bigby's sentence, and remanded the case to the district court with instructions to grant habeas corpus
Habeas corpus
is a writ, or legal action, through which a prisoner can be released from unlawful detention. The remedy can be sought by the prisoner or by another person coming to his aid. Habeas corpus originated in the English legal system, but it is now available in many nations...
relief.
Significance
According to neighborhood rumors Mr. Bigby had a "list" that he was working from. No news reports have reported this. He was captured in a motel on Vickery Blvd.. Assuming this list was factual, a Mr. Aron L. Stewart and his family were next on a list that had been documented by Mr. Bigby. However, assumably Mr. Stewart was tipped off by officials to move himself and his two minor children away from the scene as they were potentially the next victims on Mr. Bigby's "list".Thus the court struck down jury instructions
Jury instructions
Jury instructions are the set of legal rules that jurors should follow when the jury is deciding a civil or criminal case. Jury instructions are given to the jury by the jury instructor, who usually reads them aloud to the jury...
in death penalty cases that do not ask about mitigating factor
Mitigating factor
A mitigating factor, in law, is any information or evidence presented to the court regarding the defendant or the circumstances of the crime that might result in reduced charges or a lesser sentence.-Death penalty in the United States:...
s including a consideration of the defendant
Defendant
A defendant or defender is any party who is required to answer the complaint of a plaintiff or pursuer in a civil lawsuit before a court, or any party who has been formally charged or accused of violating a criminal statute...
's social, medical, and psychological history, saying that the jury must be instructed to consider mitigating factors even when answering unrelated questions. This ruling suggests that an expanded explanation including these factors be given in the jury instructions to insure the jury weighs all the mitigating factors.
This ruling also established that a defendant's mental disorder must be considered as a mitigating factor in sentencing in a death penalty case, even if mental illness was not brought up in the trial.