Causey, 185 F.3d at 413 (holding that the Government's explanations for their peremptory strikes were race neutral and not outside the realm of credibility) (citing Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765, 768 (1995)).16 Here, Davis presents arguments regarding strikes against seven African-American jurors, the same jurors whose strikes he appealed to the district court and to this court in Causey. After the conviction, Davis refused to return to the courtroom and the case proceeded to the sentencing phase in his absence. FN5. 938, 947 (E.D.La.1996). Because Davis failed to object to the verdict forms or the portion of the jury instructions pertaining to mitigation, this court reviews for plain error. Please try again. [15], Davis was convicted in 1996 on two federal civil rights charges for directing Hardy to murder Groves and for witness tampering. Their salary at that time was $18,000 a year. However, the cases Davis cites in support of this argument are distinguishable. The prosecution stated:He's already serving life for the cocaine conviction. At that point, a decision was made not to let Davis and the other two suspects remain on the street. [6], In 1994, an FBI sting caught Davis enforcing a protection racket upon the city's cocaine dealers. Five of the victims were men, but some of them were reportedly transgender. 242), Conspiracy to deprive rights resulting in death (18 U.S.C. McDuffie, 542 F.2d at 241. In 1994, Davis and Williams provide Adams policeprotection. Davis also places much weight on evidence of his violence-free prison record during the 11 years between his arrest in 1994 and his sentencing in 2005. FN16. FN10. The prosecutor also stated:Do not confuse mercy with weakness. She was seen driving around in her patrol care on duty with that thug many times and even allowed him to drive her patrol car. FN18. Here, the prosecutor's improper statements do not rise to the level of plain error. The remarks were drawn from evidence in the record and could be inferred from the evidence the jury heard. In his fourth claim, Davis complains that the victim-impact testimony and the prosecution's arguments related to that evidence were erroneous. But see United States v. McWaine, 243 F.3d 871, 873-74 (5th Cir.2001), overruled on other grounds by United States v. Cotton, 535 U.S. 625 (2002) (applying the two-step analysis where the defendant did not object to prosecutor's allegedly improper remarks); United States v. Lankford, 196 F.3d 563, 573-74 (5th Cir.1999) (same). You give him life, you don't give him death, he won't be punished at all for killing, executing Kim Marie Groves. Contact us. Who the fuck are you or Paul Hardy to decide who lives or die? Davis seeks reversal not only of his death sentences under the FDPA, but also of his convictions. He gets a free pass. "It tells us that corruption in the Police Department is pervasive, rampant and systemic.". The district court rejected this proposed instruction. Stated another way, evidence of Davis's past dangerousness is not negated by non-violent conduct in prison during a time when he is on display while the appeal of his death sentence is pending. Even if the argument were not waived, it would be unavailing on the merits. August 17, 2012. To do that, prosecutors will ask commanders whether they instructed their officers to be involved in such duties. If not now, when? ), cert denied, 546 U.S. 828 (2005)). Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the Government, see Agofsky, 458 F.3d at 374, the jury could have found the future dangerousness factor beyond a reasonable doubt. FN11. And justice can only be had by sentencing Len Davis to death. She testified that the request had been made [s]o it can be over and so Davis could spend the rest of his life thinking about what he did.10. I just got through watching Fatal Encounter, episode of Officer Ronnie Williams being shot and killed. While we see the similarities between Davis's fourth and fifth claims, Davis challenges different types of remarks for different reasons in each claim. Q. The prosecution stated:He's already serving life for the cocaine conviction. United States v. Davis, 912 F.Supp. Causey v. United States, 530 U.S. 1277 (2000)..FN16. How do you know if Sammie Williams is telling you the truth? How much investigating did you do, Dr. Streed, apart from the sheer and the bare numbers of the crime stats of 1994; I mean, did you compare things with '95? Though Davis refused to be present in the courtroom during the selection phase, he permitted his back-up counsel to proceed without him. Williams was familiar with the letter, and that the Government told him they can do that-i.e., file the 5K letter-but [t]hey didn't guarantee me that they would or would not either., In 2001, after we remanded for re-sentencing, Davis filed a motion to obtain Williams's plea agreement pursuant to Brady and Giglio. They were cryptic and they did not take on significance until compared with other events. FN1. In the context of the prosecutor's summation and the evidence overall, therefore, Davis's rights were not affected by the isolated remark. They were contemplating taking an act of violence against the primary undercover agent. Has the government-have I or any government attorney promised you anything? Although she didnt kill Officer Williams, she was just as guilty. ", "We were concerned that he may engage in acts of violence. NEW ORLEANS . all 80 Reflections, Reflections Terms of Use (revised 5/31/2012), View, edit or delete any Reflection you've left in the past. Police procedurals are stasis machines. denied, 544 U.S. 1034 (2005). The investigation ended prematurely after Justice Department officials were shown evidence that Davis ordered Groves' murder. FN6. Police Officer Ronald A. Williams, II, New Orleans Police On remand, the Government again sought the death penalty, notifying Davis and Hardy of the FDPA elements in support. at 1540. No juror found any mitigating factor. And I want you to listen to what I'm saying. We vacated the district court's order, holding that failure to include the required elements was harmless constitutional error, and remanded for re-sentencing. EOW: Sunday, July 26, 2020. Further, the testimony is reliable because both witnesses testified that they were familiar with Hardy's reputation from their own interactions with him and with Davis. J.R. March 4, 2020. After it's done, go straight Uptown and call me." A New Orleans cop has been arrested and suspended for allegedly withholding evidence involving the suspect charged in a fellow officer's shooting death, police said. I wanted to express my sympathy for the Williams family. Special Agent Juan Jackson, the undercover FBI agent acting as a drug dealer, testified that Davis was a leader in what he thought was a major drug operation and increased his responsibilities in the operation in a few months' time span. Based on its consideration of the aggravating and mitigating factors, the jury decides unanimously whether the defendant shall be sentenced to death, to life imprisonment without possibility of release, or some other lesser sentence. Davis did not appeal this ruling. It's intended to mean the same thing.. The city of New Orleans had to endure the reign of terror of Len Davis and the murderers he was protecting. Accordingly, the prosecutor's testifying, while improper, see Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 84 (1935), did not affect Davis's substantial rights. Sylvester, 143 F.3d at 928. 3592(c)(9). It was a crime that shook New Orleans to its core - 20 years ago Wednesday. The FBI agents who testified at the same hearing stated that they assumed Williams had an agreement, and indicated as such in their summaries of interviews with him after his arrest. [16][17][18] Davis is currently on federal death row and is imprisoned in United States Penitentiary, Terre Haute, Indiana. 51 (2009); Causey, 185 F.3d at 418. When asked by the prosecutor, What did Paul Hardy do?, Williams replied: He was known in the Florida project where he resided as a drug dealer and a killer. Davis, who conducted the cross-examination,6 and his back-up counsel did not object to these statements. [4], Davis was known in the community as "RoboCop" because of his large size and the "Desire terrorist" due to his aggressive policing style. Most of the prosecutor's comments in the summation referred to Hardy's involvement in Groves's murder, and were corroborated by the wiretap tapes. On the day of Groves' murder, he and Davis He didn't have the decency to apologize. A rookie New Orleans police officer is forced to balance her identity as a black woman after she witnesses two corrupt cops committing murder. Ride along with the police officers, the firefighters, and the paramedics as they tackle the evils of the night. First, during closing arguments at the selection phase, prosecutors stated that sentencing Davis to life imprisonment for his convictions under 18 U.S.C. During the second or selection phase of Davis's re-sentencing hearing, the Government presented evidence to prove that Davis posed a threat of future dangerousness while imprisoned, a non-statutory aggravating factor. He is incorrect. See Bernard, 299 F.3d at 482 (concluding that evidence of propensity for orchestrated criminal activity in prison permitted finding of future dangerousness). On August 17, 2005, Davis filed a motion for judgment of acquittal and a new trial. Davis arranged to meet Hardy and Causey at the police station to view photos of homicide cases. Here, the remark was not directed to facts outside the record or unrelated to the evidence introduced at trial. at 1374. If a policeman killing a citizen using a drug dealer that he is protecting is not enough, then what is? United States v. Davis, 912 F.Supp. The categories at issue here relate to: (1) Davis's good character evidence (proposed factors 7, 8, 9, and 10); (2) the culpability and relatively lenient punishment imposed on other individuals involved in Groves's murder and the drug conspiracy (factors 1, 2, 4, and 5); and (3) the stressful and dangerous conditions of his job (proposed factors 11, 12, and 13). Williams, Davis's partner in 1994, also testified that Davis recruited other police officers to guard warehouses of drugs and to escort drug couriers in their deliveries, and that Davis paid the recruits from money received from the undercover FBI agent. We affirmed Causey's conviction and sentence, and affirmed Davis's and Hardy's convictions on Counts 1 and 2. While answering a fellow officer's call for assistance, Len Davis joined in the chase of 3 armed men and was shot in the stomach.