Summary
The Supreme Court of Kentucky reviewed Michael D. St. Clair's capital kidnapping conviction and death sentence, along with related convictions. The court held that certain statements by St. Clair's wife were protected by the marital communications privilege and that their admission was prejudicial, requiring a retrial. The court also provided guidance on capital sentencing aggravators and identified additional evidentiary errors likely to recur on retrial.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether testimony by St. Clair's wife concerning four marital communications was protected by the confidential marital communications privilege under KRE 504.
- Whether the KRE 504(c)(1) joint-criminal-activity exception applied when the wife assisted St. Clair's flight but was not shown to have participated in the crimes charged.
- Whether the penalty-phase instructions properly identified aggravating circumstances supporting death eligibility for capital kidnapping.
- Whether a prior conviction remains a prior conviction for purposes of KRS 532.025(2)(a)(1) while an appeal is pending.
- Whether the Commonwealth was required to allege penalty aggravators in the indictment.
- Whether testimony concerning alleged coercion of a witness, prior preliminary-hearing testimony, and the victim's statements about his family and desire to go home was admissible.
Holdings
- The joint-criminal-activity exception to marital privilege applies only when sufficient evidence supports a finding that both spouses conspired or acted jointly in committing the crime charged; the wife's assistance with St. Clair's flight did not establish that exception for the charged offenses.
- Statements two and three were confidential marital communications under KRE 504(b) and should have been excluded; statements one and four required factual hearings on remand because the record was insufficient to determine their confidential nature.
- Admission of the privileged marital communications was prejudicial error requiring reversal and retrial.
- If the evidence on retrial is substantially the same, the jury must be instructed that death eligibility for capital kidnapping requires a finding that St. Clair murdered Frank Brady during the kidnapping; the fact that the victim was not released alive, standing alone, is not an aggravating circumstance authorizing capital punishment under KRS 532.025(2).
- For purposes of KRS 532.025(2)(a)(1), a prior conviction exists upon an accepted guilty plea or a guilty verdict by a judge or jury, and a pending appeal does not prevent use of the conviction as a prior capital conviction.
- First-degree robbery is a proper aggravating circumstance for capital kidnapping, and the robbery instruction was proper because it followed the model instruction and statutory language.
- Kentucky law requires written pretrial notice of the aggravating evidence supporting a death-penalty request but does not require penalty aggravators to be alleged in the indictment.
- Testimony concerning alleged coercion of a witness, the Oklahoma preliminary-hearing transcript, and the victim's statements about his family and desire to go home was erroneously admitted or should be excluded on retrial.
Key quotations
“Plainly, this exception to the privilege applies only if each spouse has contributed to or participated in the crime charged.” (480)
“For these reasons statements two and three fall within the ambit of a confidential communication, and should have been excluded by virtue of the marital privilege.” (480)
“Consequently, the admission of Bylynn's testimony was prejudicial error and retrial is required.” (481)
“If the evidence on retrial is substantially the same, the jury shall be instructed that capital punishment may not be imposed unless the jury finds that St. Clair murdered Frank Brady during the course of the kidnapping.” (482-483)
“This testimony was not admissible as a dying declaration because the statements did not concern the impending causes of the victim’s death, and it is not clear that the victim was aware of his impending death.” (486)
Factual background
After escaping from an Oklahoma jail, St. Clair and Dennis Gene Reese stole vehicles and weapons, traveled through several states, kidnapped Frank Brady in Kentucky, and drove him to Bullitt County, where St. Clair shot and killed him. They then returned to Hardin County and burned another stolen truck; St. Clair later fired at a pursuing Kentucky State Police officer. St. Clair's wife, Bylynn, testified about four conversations with St. Clair concerning weapons, travel, and the burned truck, and the Commonwealth also introduced other disputed evidence during the trial.
Procedural history
St. Clair was convicted in Hardin County of two counts of receiving stolen property over $100, attempted murder, second-degree arson, and capital kidnapping, receiving an aggregate fifty-year sentence on the noncapital offenses and a death sentence for capital kidnapping. He appealed to the Supreme Court of Kentucky, which had previously reversed the penalty phase of a related capital-murder case and remanded for a new penalty hearing. The court reversed the convictions and death sentence in this appeal and remanded for a new trial because privileged marital communications and other inadmissible evidence had been admitted.
Remand instructions
The trial court must conduct a new trial. On remand, statements two and three must be excluded as privileged marital communications; the court must hold evidentiary hearings and make factual findings concerning the confidential nature of statements one and four. If the evidence is substantially the same, the penalty-phase instructions must require a finding that St. Clair murdered Frank Brady during the kidnapping, may use the prior capital convictions and first-degree robbery aggravator consistently with the opinion, and must exclude the identified coercion testimony, preliminary-hearing transcript, and inadmissible victim statements.