Summary
The Supreme Court of Nevada held that the district court improperly joined charges arising from the alleged Casey kidnapping and extortion with charges concerning the Binion murder, robbery, and silver theft. The joinder and inadequate limiting instruction substantially prejudiced the defendants, requiring reversal of their convictions on the Binion and silver counts and a new trial on those matters. The court affirmed Tabish’s Casey-count convictions, finding the joinder error harmless as to those counts.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether joinder of the Casey counts with the Binion and silver counts was improper and unfairly prejudicial.
- Whether the Casey evidence was admissible under the complete-story exception or as prior-bad-act evidence and therefore supported joinder.
- Whether Tabish and Murphy were entitled to separate trials on the remaining counts.
- Whether admission of Binion's statement to his estate attorney without a limiting instruction was reversible error.
- Whether the State presented sufficient evidence of criminal agency to support the murder charge.
- Whether the jury had to unanimously agree on a single factual theory of criminal agency.
- Whether other alleged errors, including aiding-and-abetting allegations and juror misconduct, required reversal.
Holdings
- The district court improperly denied severance because the Casey, Binion, and silver incidents were not sufficiently connected as parts of a common scheme or plan, and joinder was manifestly prejudicial to the trial of the Binion and silver counts.
- The Casey evidence did not support joinder under Nevada's complete-story exception or cross-admissibility principles.
- The district court manifestly abused its discretion by admitting Binion's statement under the state-of-mind exception without instructing the jury that it could consider the statement only to determine Binion's state of mind, and the error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
- The State presented sufficient evidence for a rational juror to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Binion's death resulted from criminal agency, and the jury was not required to unanimously agree on whether the criminal agency was suffocation or poisoning.
Key quotations
“In our view, the Binion charges presented the jury with a close case, and the joinder of the Casey counts rendered the trial of the Binion counts fundamentally unfair.” (592)
“We now conclude, in accord with the reasoning of the plurality opinion in Schad, that when conflicting or alternative theories of criminal agency are offered through the medium of competent evidence, the jury need only achieve unanimity that a criminal agency in evidence was the cause of death; the jury need not achieve unanimity on a single theory of criminal agency.” (597)
Factual background
Ted Binion was found dead at his Las Vegas home after heroin, Xanax, and Valium were detected in his blood. The State alleged that Tabish and Murphy murdered or robbed Binion and then stole approximately $8 million in silver from an underground vault in Pahrump; Tabish was also charged with kidnapping, assaulting, and extorting Leo Casey in connection with Casey's interest in a sand pit. The evidence concerning Binion's death was conflicting, with most medical experts attributing the death to an overdose and prosecution expert Michael Baden opining that Binion had been suffocated. Binion's estate attorney testified that Binion had said, "Take Sandy [Murphy] out of the will if she doesn't kill me tonight. If I'm dead, you'll know what happened," but the jury received no limiting instruction restricting the statement to Binion's state of mind.
Procedural history
The district court denied motions to sever the Casey counts and to grant separate trials, admitted testimony concerning a statement made by Binion to his estate attorney without a limiting instruction, and entered judgments after the jury convicted both appellants on the Binion and silver counts and Tabish on the Casey counts. The district court denied posttrial motions for a new trial and judgment of acquittal or notwithstanding the verdict. The Nevada Supreme Court reversed the convictions arising from the Binion and silver counts and remanded for a new trial on those matters, while affirming Tabish's Casey-count convictions.
Remand instructions
Reverse appellants' convictions on the Binion and silver counts and remand for a new trial on those matters alone. The joint retrial of Tabish and Murphy on the remaining Binion and silver charges is permissible. Affirm Tabish's convictions on the Casey counts.