Summary
The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed Olland Reese’s murder conviction and forty-seven-year sentence. The court held that the trial court properly excluded proposed alternative-suspect evidence concerning a letter, an alleged threat, and speculative evidence about another suspect because the evidence was inadmissible hearsay, unpreserved, or insufficiently connected to the crime.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court properly excluded evidence concerning Tyler Swisher's letter as inadmissible hearsay and whether Reese preserved his argument under the statement-against-penal-interest exception.
- Whether testimony recounting Megan Cochran's alleged threat to kill Green was properly excluded as hearsay.
- Whether evidence implicating Cochran as an alternative suspect was properly excluded because Reese failed to establish a reasonable connection between Cochran and the crime.
- What standard governs the admission or exclusion of alternative-suspect evidence.
Holdings
- The trial court properly excluded evidence concerning the contents of Swisher's letter. Reese failed to preserve his statement-against-penal-interest argument, the relevant portion of the letter no longer existed, his offer of proof was speculative and inconsistent with the expected testimony, and he failed to show that Swisher was unavailable.
- The trial court properly excluded Reil's testimony about Cochran's alleged threat to kill Green as hearsay because Reil was not the declarant and the statement was offered for the truth of the matter asserted.
- A defendant may present evidence that another person committed the charged crime only when the evidence has sufficient probative value to raise a reasonable doubt about the defendant's culpability and the defendant reasonably establishes a connection between the alternative perpetrator and the crime through admissible evidence.
Key quotations
“A defendant is permitted to present evidence tending to establish that another is responsible for the crime for which he is charged, and the trial court must admit that evidence “if it is of sufficient probative value to raise a reasonable doubt as to the defendant’s culpability.”” (877 A.2d at 1092-93)
“The defendant must reasonably establish the connection between the alternative perpetrator and the crime through admissible evidence.” (877 A.2d at 1093)
“Without such evidence a defendant cannot be allowed to use the trial to conduct an investigation that [the defendant] hopes will convert what amounts to speculation into a connection between the other person and the crime.” (877 A.2d at 1093)
Factual background
Cody Green disappeared after being dropped off at the house where Reese lived with his mother, and her body was later found buried in the woods behind the house. The State presented circumstantial evidence linking Reese to the murder, including Green's blood and DNA in the house and on a hatchet, duct tape and fiber evidence, Reese's knowledge of nonpublic details, and inconsistent accounts of his whereabouts. Reese sought to introduce evidence suggesting that Chris Brawn, Megan Cochran, or Tyler Swisher could have been involved, but the trial court excluded portions of that evidence as hearsay, speculative, unpreserved, or insufficiently connected to the crime.
Procedural history
After Cody Green was murdered, Reese was charged and tried in the Superior Court in Sagadahoc County. Before and during trial, the court excluded or limited evidence concerning alleged alternative suspects, including evidence relating to a letter by Tyler Swisher and a threat attributed to Megan Cochran. The jury convicted Reese, and the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine affirmed the judgment.