Summary
The Supreme Court of Oregon reviewed the conviction and death sentence of Christian Michael Longo for seven aggravated murders. The court addressed claims involving the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, extradition from Mexico, Miranda rights, and the State's use of peremptory challenges during jury selection, and affirmed the judgment.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, the United States-Mexico extradition treaty, or the Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual barred prosecution or imposition of a death sentence because Longo was arrested in Mexico and voluntarily returned to the United States.
- Whether Longo's statements to police should have been suppressed because of alleged Miranda, Vienna Convention, or involuntariness violations.
- Whether the State violated Batson and Oregon law by using peremptory challenges against minority-group members.
- Whether the State violated statutory discovery obligations or Brady by failing to disclose a discrepancy in the Crabb witnesses' accounts of noises heard near the murders.
- Whether testimony concerning statements by Mary Jane Longo was admissible as an excited utterance.
- Whether Oregon was constitutionally required to establish statewide standards for imposing the death penalty or to permit discovery concerning statewide sentencing practices.
- Whether the second and fourth Oregon death-penalty questions had to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
- Whether evidence concerning Mexican extradition law was admissible as mitigating character evidence during the penalty phase.
Holdings
- The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations does not create an individually enforceable right for a criminal defendant, and Article 36 gives consular officers a right, not a duty, to visit and arrange legal representation. The manner of Longo's return from Mexico therefore did not bar prosecution or the death sentence.
- The trial court properly refused to suppress Longo's statements because he received Miranda warnings before the interviews, never unequivocally requested counsel, and did not invoke a general right to remain silent while continuing to speak with police.
- The State did not violate Batson or Oregon law by striking the challenged jurors because the record did not establish a prima facie inference of purposeful discrimination.
- The State did not violate Oregon's statutory discovery requirements or Brady by failing to include in its memorandum that the Crabb witnesses disagreed about the source of the noises.
- The trial court properly admitted Mary Jane Longo's statements to her sister under the excited-utterance exception because the discovery of the emails and Longo's statements caused continuing shock and distress.
- Neither the Oregon nor federal constitution required Oregon to establish statewide standards governing who receives the death penalty, and the trial court properly denied discovery directed to statewide sentencing practices.
- The State had to prove the second death-penalty question—the probability of future criminal violence—beyond a reasonable doubt, but the fourth question, whether the defendant should receive death after weighing aggravating and mitigating evidence, did not carry a burden of proof.
- The trial court properly excluded evidence concerning Mexican extradition law because it did not make any aspect of Longo's character more or less probable and therefore was not relevant mitigating evidence.
Key quotations
“Instead, a defendant satisfies the requirements of Batson's first step by producing evidence sufficient to permit the trial judge to draw an inference that discrimination has occurred.” (341 Or. 580, 148 P.3d 892, 901)
“The fact that the state must prove is the probability of future dangerousness, not any particular future criminal act.” (341 Or. 580, 148 P.3d 892, 906)
Factual background
Longo murdered his wife, Mary Jane Longo, and their three children in Oregon in December 2001, disposing of the bodies in waterways and fleeing through California to Mexico. He was arrested by Mexican authorities and voluntarily returned to the United States after an FBI agent explained the options of extradition, deportation, and voluntary return. After receiving Miranda warnings, Longo made statements to law enforcement. He was convicted of seven aggravated murders, three by guilty plea and four by jury verdict, and sentenced to death.
Procedural history
The trial court denied Longo's pretrial and penalty-phase motions, including challenges based on the Vienna Convention, Miranda, Batson, discovery, hearsay, and Oregon's death-penalty procedures. The court entered convictions and a death sentence. The Oregon Supreme Court reviewed the conviction and sentence automatically and directly and affirmed.