State v. Griffin

279 Kan. 634 (2005) · Supreme Court of Kansas · June 3, 2005 · No. No. 89,662

Summary

The Supreme Court of Kansas reviewed Ethan M. Griffin’s convictions for two counts of felony murder, five counts of aggravated battery, and two counts of burglary arising from an apartment explosion and fire. The court addressed claims involving inconsistent prosecutorial theories, prosecutorial misconduct in closing argument, and ineffective assistance of counsel, including counsel’s failure to introduce testimony and objections to evidence. The opinion affirms the rulings challenged on the issues discussed in the provided text.

Court
Supreme Court of Kansas
Writing for the Court
Allegrucci, J.; Rulon, C.J., assigned; Larson, S.J., assigned
Jurisdiction
Kansas
Decision date
June 3, 2005
Docket number
No. 89,662
Procedural posture
Direct appeal from convictions for two counts of felony murder, five counts of aggravated battery, and two counts of burglary, including review of a remand ruling denying ineffective-assistance-of-counsel relief.
Standard of review
Issues not raised before the trial court generally are not considered on appeal, subject to limited exceptions. Prosecutorial-misconduct claims are reviewed under a two-step inquiry: whether the challenged comments exceeded the wide latitude allowed prosecutors and, if so, whether they constituted plain error that prejudiced the defendant and denied a fair trial. Ineffective-assistance claims present mixed questions of law and fact reviewed de novo, although factual findings are considered. Sufficiency of the evidence is reviewed by asking whether, viewing all evidence in the light most favorable to the State, a rational jury could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Unobjected-to jury instructions are reviewed for clear error. Evidentiary error is harmless when it does not affirmatively prejudice substantial rights.
Precedential value
Published Kansas Supreme Court opinion; precedential.
Parties
Ethan M. Griffin v. State of Kansas
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

criminal procedureprosecutorial misconductineffective assistanceevidenceappellate procedure

Practice areas

criminal lawcriminal procedureappellate procedureevidenceconstitutional law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the State deprived Griffin of a fair trial by using inconsistent prosecutorial theories in Griffin's and Dixon's trials.
  2. Whether the prosecutor committed misconduct by misstating the evidence or law during closing argument.
  3. Whether Griffin received ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
  4. Whether the evidence was sufficient to establish felony murder.
  5. Whether the evidence was sufficient to establish aggravated battery based on injuries to rescuers.
  6. Whether the trial court erred by refusing lesser-included-offense instructions on felony murder.
  7. Whether evidence that Griffin accompanied Dixon to Dixon's attorney's office was improperly admitted.
  8. Whether the felony-murder jury instruction incorrectly included flight from an attempted felony.
  9. Whether the burglary instruction improperly permitted alternative intents without requiring unanimity as to a specific intent.
  10. Whether the trial court's response to the jury's question about intent for aggravated arson was misleading or confusing.

Holdings

  1. The court declined to address the claim because Griffin did not raise it before the trial court and did not argue for an exception to the preservation rule.
  2. The challenged statements did not exceed the wide latitude permitted to the prosecutor and did not constitute reversible prosecutorial misconduct.
  3. Griffin failed to establish deficient performance and prejudice sufficient to warrant reversal or relief.
  4. The evidence was sufficient for a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Griffin was criminally liable for the deaths under the felony-murder rule.
  5. The evidence was sufficient for a rational jury to find Griffin guilty of aggravated battery because injuries to rescuers were reasonably foreseeable consequences of the burglary and resulting fire.
  6. The trial court was not required to give lesser-included-offense instructions because the evidence of the underlying burglary was neither weak nor inconclusive.
  7. Any error in admitting the brief testimony was harmless and did not require reversal.
  8. The instruction was not reversible error because the challenged phrase, flight from attempting to commit an inherently dangerous felony, was not a misstatement of Kansas law, although the instruction improperly repeated felony murder and omitted the premeditated-murder alternative.
  9. Jury unanimity was not required as to whether the burglary intent was theft, aggravated arson, or criminal damage to property because those were alternative means of committing one offense, not multiple acts.
  10. The response was neither misleading nor confusing, and the issue also need not be considered because Griffin was acquitted of aggravated arson.

Key quotations

We hold that the death need not occur during or after the commission of the felony to support a conviction for felony murder. The question for the jury is whether the death is within the res gestae of the crime, regardless of the actual sequence of events. (279 Kan. at 642)
The gas line was broken during perpetration of the burglary, and the resulting explosion was part of the continuous transaction. (279 Kan. at 657)
In an alternative means case, where a single offense may be committed in more than one way, there must be jury unanimity as to guilt for the single crime charged. Unanimity is not required, however, as to the means by which the crime was committed so long as substantial evidence supports each alternative means. (279 Kan. at 663)

Factual background

In July 2001, Griffin and Wallace Dixon participated in burglaries of Alicia Shaw's apartment in Emporia, Kansas. During a second entry, the men pushed over a stove, breaking a gas-supply pipe; escaping gas later ignited, causing an explosion and fire that killed Dana and Gabriel Hudson and injured three neighbors who attempted rescues. Griffin testified for the State at Dixon's trial but did not testify at his own trial.

Procedural history

Griffin was convicted in the district court and sentenced to two consecutive life terms, each with no parole eligibility for 20 years, plus 72 consecutive months. After his appeal was docketed, the Supreme Court granted a motion for remand to permit the district court to consider ineffective-assistance claims. The district court held a hearing and denied relief. The Supreme Court of Kansas affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…