Mark Dwyatt Brown v. State of Alabama

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 10/01/2010 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f o r m a l r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , A l a b a m a A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OCTOBER TERM, 2009-2010 CR-08-0805 Mark Dwyatt Brown v. S t a t e o f Alabama Appeal from Cleburne C i r c u i t (CC-07-32) On A p p l i c a t i o n f o r a Court Rehearing WISE, P r e s i d i n g J u d g e . The withdrawn opinion that was and t h e f o l l o w i n g released on July i s substituted 30, 2010, i s therefor. CR-08-0805 The appellant, seventeen killings Dwyatt counts of c a p i t a l o f Lena Maye Baxter Benefield and D u r w a r d III, Mark Brown, murder Chandler B e n e f i e l d Tysinger Code 1 9 7 5 . course the robbery-murder the arson-murder respectively. I I , o f Lena, See § 1 3 A - 5 - 4 0 ( a ) ( 2 ) , burglary with S h a b l e , Reo, a n d Durward, r e s p e c t i v e l y . Code 1 9 7 5 . ("Reo"), c h a r g e d Brown b e c a u s e he c o m m i t t e d i t d u r i n g t h e second-degree Ala. Shable Counts I , C o u n t s V, V I , V I I , a n d V I I I made c a p i t a l of a ("Lena"), B e n e f i e l d ("Durward"). of with the ( " S h a b l e " ) , Reo W i l l i a m B e n e f i e l d and I V c h a r g e d him w i t h w i t h murder convicted i n connection S h a b l e , Reo, a n d Durward, r e s p e c t i v e l y . Ala. was regard t o Lena, See § 1 3 A - 5 - 4 0 ( a ) ( 4 ) , C o u n t s I X , X, X I , a n d X I I c h a r g e d h i m w i t h of Lena, Shable, Reo, and Durward, See § 1 3 A - 5 - 4 0 ( a ) ( 9 ) , A l a . Code 1975. Counts X I I I , X I V , XV, a n d X V I c h a r g e d Brown w i t h murder made c a p i t a l b e c a u s e he c o m m i t t e d i t d u r i n g t h e c o u r s e o f a first-degree b u r g l a r y o f L e n a , S h a b l e , Reo, a n d Durward, r e s p e c t i v e l y . § 1 3 A - 5 - 4 0 ( a ) ( 4 ) , A l a . Code 1975. F i n a l l y , Count X V I I c h a r g e d h i m w i t h murder made c a p i t a l b e c a u s e he k i l l e d Reo, and Durward course of conduct. See Lena, S h a b l e , by one a c t o r p u r s u a n t t o one scheme o r See § 13A-5-40(a) ( 1 0 ) , A l a . Code 1975. 2 By CR-08-0805 a v o t e o f 11-1, to death. t h e j u r y recommended t h a t Brown be The t r i a l c o u r t accepted the j u r y ' s and s e n t e n c e d h i m t o d e a t h . Brown was sentenced recommendation a l s o c o n v i c t e d of one c o u n t o f c o n s p i r a c y t o commit c a p i t a l m u r d e r , a v i o l a t i o n §§ 13A-4-3 and 13A-5-40, A l a . Code 1975, sentenced him conviction. to serve Brown f i l e d a term a motion d e n i e d by o p e r a t i o n o f l a w . This appeal See 45A, objection case this imposed, Rule we i s a case have A l a . R. at t r i a l involving i n prison f o r a new trial, See R u l e 24.4, will i n which reviewed the App. A l a . R. on that which was Crim. P. the P. record Although the death p e n a l t y , i t w i l l ( A l a . 1985). d e a t h p e n a l t y has for plain the error. lack of n o t b a r o u r r e v i e w o f an i s s u e c l a i m o f p r e j u d i c e Brown may So. 2d 1106 life court followed. Because been of and t h e t r i a l of raise. weigh in a a g a i n s t any See Ex p a r t e Kennedy, R u l e 45A, A l a . R. App. an 472 P., p r o v i d e s : " I n a l l c a s e s i n w h i c h t h e d e a t h p e n a l t y has been i m p o s e d , t h e C o u r t o f C r i m i n a l A p p e a l s s h a l l n o t i c e any p l a i n e r r o r o r d e f e c t i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g s u n d e r r e v i e w ... w h e n e v e r s u c h e r r o r has o r p r o b a b l y has a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t e d t h e s u b s t a n t i a l r i g h t o f t h e appellant." " [ T h i s ] p l a i n - e r r o r e x c e p t i o n to the contemporaneous-objection r u l e i s t o be ' u s e d s p a r i n g l y , s o l e l y i n those circumstances 3 CR-08-0805 in which a m i s c a r r i a g e of j u s t i c e U n i t e d S t a t e s v. Young, 470 U.S. 84 L. U.S. 816 Ed. 152, n.14 The 2d 163 1 (1985) n.14, 102 would otherwise 1, 15, 105 (quoting United S. Ct. 1584, S. C t . 1038, States 1592 result.'" n.14, v. 1046, Frady, 456 71 L. Ed. 2d (1982)). f o l l o w i n g summary o f t h e r e l e v a n t f a c t s , as by t h e t r i a l c o u r t , may be h e l p f u l t o an u n d e r s t a n d i n g prepared of t h i s case: "On F e b r u a r y 8, 2005, L e n a Maye C h a n d l e r B e n e f i e l d and her sons, Durward T y s i n g e r Benefield, Reo W i l l i a m B e n e f i e l d and S h a b l e B a x t e r B e n e f i e l d l i v e d together i n Cleburne County. M a r k Brown was a r e s i d e n t of Calhoun County. He had r e c e i v e d money f r o m Reo W i l l i a m B e n e f i e l d i n t h e p a s t . M a r k Brown a l l e g e d t h i s was 'hush money' f o r p a s t s e x u a l abuse he r e c e i v e d f r o m Reo. An a g r e e m e n t was made b e t w e e n Mark Brown, Shannon Brown and Tim M o r r i s t o g e t money f r o m Reo B e n e f i e l d and h i s r e l a t i v e s t h a t l i v e d i n t h e h o u s e w i t h him. The morning of F e b r u a r y 8, 2005, M a r k Brown, Shannon Brown and Tim M o r r i s met a t Mark Brown's r e s i d e n c e i n C a l h o u n County. T h e y l e f t t h e r e s i d e n c e a r o u n d 7 a.m. and went t o W a l - M a r t i n O x f o r d . Mark Brown t o o k h i s s o n ' s b a s e b a l l b a t w i t h him when he l e f t . A t WalMart, the t h r e e purchased 3 r o l l s of duct tape, 3 s k i masks and 3 p a i r s o f g l o v e s . T h i s was confirmed by v i d e o s u r v e i l l a n c e o f t h e p a r k i n g l o t o f t h e s t o r e as w e l l as a camera a t t h e r e g i s t e r where t h e i t e m s were p u r c h a s e d . The t h r e e s o m e t h e n t r a v e l e d t o C l e b u r n e C o u n t y where t h e y made a s t o p a t T i m Morris' s i s t e r ' s residence. Mr. M o r r i s g o t a gun t h a t he had l e f t t h e r e . T h e y t h e n p r o c e e d e d t o t h e Benefield residence. They h i d t h e m s e l v e s i n an a b a n d o n e d c h i c k e n house t h a t Reo B e n e f i e l d u s e d as 4 CR-08-0805 a w o r k s h o p . The t h r e e c o - d e f e n d a n t s c o n f r o n t e d Reo. They b o u n d h i m a n d p l a c e d a dog f o o d b a g o v e r h i s head. A f t e r a s s a u l t i n g Reo w h i l e i n t h e c h i c k e n h o u s e , t h e d e f e n d a n t s t o o k Reo t o t h e r e s i d e n c e . Lena Benefield, Shable Benefield and Durward B e n e f i e l d were p r e s e n t a t t h e r e s i d e n c e . " W h i l e i n s i d e , S h a b l e B e n e f i e l d was f o r c e d t o w r i t e two c h e c k s ( C o l o n i a l Bank #0208 i n t h e amount of $11,480.00 a n d S o u t h T r u s t Bank #1423 i n t h e amount o f $8,590.00) p a y a b l e t o Reo B e n e f i e l d . Mark Brown t o o k a t r u c k b e l o n g i n g t o S h a b l e B e n e f i e l d . He a n d Reo B e n e f i e l d went t o b o t h b a n k s a n d c a s h e d the checks. T h e s e t r a n s a c t i o n s were c o n f i r m e d by w i t n e s s t e s t i m o n y f r o m p e r s o n n e l f r o m e a c h bank a n d v i d e o s u r v e i l l a n c e from t h e banks. Additionally, the c h e c k drawn on t h e C o l o n i a l Bank a c c o u n t h a d body f l u i d s on i t w h i c h was f o u n d t o c o n t a i n t h e DNA of Reo B e n e f i e l d a n d Mark Brown. M a r k Brown a n d Reo B e n e f i e l d then r e t u r n e d t o the r e s i d e n c e . " A t some p o i n t , a l l o f t h e v i c t i m s e x c e p t 88 y e a r o l d L e n a B e n e f i e l d were b o u n d w i t h d u c t t a p e s e c u r i n g t h e i r hands and f e e t . A d d i t i o n a l l y , duct t a p e was p l a c e d o v e r t h e i r mouth and e y e s . A l l v i c t i m s were b e a t e n a b o u t t h e h e a d . Reo B e n e f i e l d d i e d as a r e s u l t o f b l u n t f o r c e t r a u m a . The o t h e r s were b e a t e n u n t i l t h e y were u n c o n s c i o u s . Two f i r e s were s e t i n t h e h o u s e a n d t h e d e f e n d a n t s l e f t t h e residence. Lena, S h a b l e and Durward B e n e f i e l d a l l d i e d from a c o m b i n a t i o n o f b l u n t f o r c e trauma and from i n h a l i n g p a r t i c l e s o f combustion from t h e f i r e . S i g n s were f o u n d on t h e i r f a c e s i n d i c a t i n g t h e y i n h a l e d smoke f r o m t h e f i r e . Additionally, their b l o o d c o n t a i n e d i n d i c a t o r s t h a t t h e i r l u n g s had p r o c e s s e d t h e smoke. "When the defendants left the Benefield r e s i d e n c e , they took Shable B e n e f i e l d ' s t r u c k t h a t h a d been u s e d by Mark Brown t o d r i v e t o t h e b a n k s . The d e f e n d a n t s t o o k p a r t o f t h e money a n d b r o u g h t a truck. A d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h i s t r u c k was r e l a y e d t o 5 CR-08-0805 l o c a l law enforcement. The t r u c k was s p o t t e d b y Cleburne County d e p u t i e s . The t r u c k was s t o p p e d . Shannon Brown was d r i v i n g . M a r k Brown a n d T i m M o r r i s jumped o u t o f t h e t r u c k a n d r a n . Shannon Brown was f o u n d i n p o s s e s s i o n o f $6,800.00 i n c a s h i n c l u d i n g one s t a c k w i t h a S o u t h T r u s t b a n k w r a p p e r . "Mark Brown was f o u n d a s h o r t t i m e l a t e r . A f t e r he was t a k e n i n t o c u s t o d y , an amount o f c u r r e n c y ($8,000) was turned into the Cleburne County S h e r i f f ' s O f f i c e b y an i n d i v i d u a l who l i v e d a t t h e r e s i d e n c e where Mark Brown h a d b e e n h i d i n g . "Mark Brown was g i v e n h i s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r i g h t s and he gave a s t a t e m e n t r e g a r d i n g h i s i n v o l v e m e n t i n the crime." (C.R. 73-75.) Brown argues that "[t]he trial when i t i n s t r u c t e d t h e j u r y t h a t court reversibly erred i t could c o n v i c t [ h i m ] of c a p i t a l m u r d e r e v e n i f he d i d n o t p o s s e s s t h e s p e c i f i c i n t e n t to kill." (Brown's b r i e f contends t h a t "the t r i a l that at p. 11.) Specifically, he court repeatedly i n s t r u c t e d the j u r y [he] c o u l d be c o n v i c t e d o f c a p i t a l m u r d e r as l o n g as one of h i s co-defendants possessed the s p e c i f i c (Brown's b r i e f a t p. 12.) Therefore, he c o n c l u d e s jury believed that i t could convict even the r e q u i s i t e i f he d i d not possess (Brown's b r i e f a t p. 12.) intent to kill." that "the [him] o f c a p i t a l murder intent to B e c a u s e Brown d i d n o t p r e s e n t 6 kill." this CR-08-0805 argument to the t r i a l court, we r e v i e w i t f o r p l a i n error. See R u l e 45A, A l a . R. App. P. "Alabama a p p e l l a t e c o u r t s have r e p e a t e d l y h e l d that, t o be c o n v i c t e d of capital o f f e n s e and s e n t e n c e d t o d e a t h , a d e f e n d a n t must have h a d a p a r t i c u l a r i z e d i n t e n t t o k i l l a n d t h e j u r y must have been c h a r g e d on t h e r e q u i r e m e n t o f s p e c i f i c i n t e n t to k i l l . E . g . , Gamble v . S t a t e , 791 So. 2d 409, 444 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 2 0 0 0 ) ; F l o w e r s v . S t a t e , 799 So. 2 d 966, 984 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1 9 9 9 ) ; Duncan v. S t a t e , 827 So. 2 d 838, 848 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1 9 9 9 ) . " Z i e g l e r v . S t a t e , 886 So. 2 d 127, 140 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 2 0 0 3 ) . "'"[N]o defendant i s guilty of a c a p i t a l o f f e n s e u n l e s s he h a d an i n t e n t t o k i l l , a n d t h a t i n t e n t t o k i l l c a n n o t be s u p p l i e d by t h e f e l o n y murder d o c t r i n e . B e c k v . S t a t e , 396 So. 2d 645, 662 ( A l a . M a r c h 6, 1 9 8 1 ) " ; C a r n e s , A l a b a m a ' s 1981 C a p i t a l P u n i s h m e n t S t a t u t e , 42 A l a . Law. 456, 468 ( 1 9 8 1 ) . See a l s o Emmund v . F l o r i d a , 458 U.S. 782, 102 S. C t . 3368, 73 L. E d . 2d 1140 ( 1 9 8 2 ) , b u t s e e G o d b o l t v. S t a t e , 429 So. 2 d 1131, 1134 ( A l a . C r . App. 1 9 8 2 ) , h o l d i n g t h a t Emmund i s i n a p p l i c a b l e t o a d e f e n d a n t who does n o t r e c e i v e t h e death penalty. However, a n o n - t r i g g e r man can be c o n v i c t e d o f a c a p i t a l o f f e n s e i f he was a k n o w i n g a c c o m p l i c e t o t h e i n t e n t i o n a l killing itself. R i t t e r v . S t a t e , 375 So. 2d 270 ( A l a . 1 9 7 9 ) . "[T]he accomplice l i a b i l i t y d o c t r i n e may be u s e d t o c o n v i c t a n o n - t r i g g e r man a c c o m p l i c e , i f , b u t o n l y i f , t h e d e f e n d a n t was an a c c o m p l i c e i n t h e i n t e n t i o n a l k i l l i n g a s o p p o s e d t o b e i n g an accomplice merely i n the underlying f e l o n y . " Ex p a r t e R a i n e s , 429 So. 2 d 1 1 1 1 , 1112 ( A l a . 1 9 8 2 ) , c e r t . d e n i e d , 460 U.S. 7 CR-08-0805 1103, 103 S. (1983). C t . 1804, 76 L. E d . 2d 368 "'Alabama's 1981 c a p i t a l p u n i s h m e n t s t a t u t e u n d e r w h i c h [ t h e d e f e n d a n t ] was c o n v i c t e d " p r o v i d e s t h a t a d e f e n d a n t who does n o t p e r s o n a l l y commit t h e i n t e n t i o n a l killing which i s part of the c a p i t a l o f f e n s e i s n o n e t h e l e s s g u i l t y o f i t and can be c o n v i c t e d o f t h e c a p i t a l o f f e n s e , i f t h a t defendant i n t e n t i o n a l l y promotes or assists in the commission of the i n t e n t i o n a l k i l l i n g w h i c h i s a c t u a l l y done by a n o t h e r . " C a r n e s , 42 A l a . Law a t 471. "'Our d u t y on a p p e a l was s t a t e d i n R a i n e s , 429 So. 2d a t 1113. "To a f f i r m a f i n d i n g o f a ' p a r t i c u l a r i z e d i n t e n t to k i l l ' , t h e j u r y must be p r o p e r l y c h a r g e d on the i n t e n t t o k i l l i s s u e , a n d t h e r e must be s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e f r o m w h i c h a r a ti o n a l io j u r y could conclude that the defendant possessed the i n t e n t to k i l l . " ' " L e w i s v. S t a t e , App. 1 9 8 4 ) . " Rowell v. State, 570 456 So. 2d 413, 416-17 So. 2d 848, 850-51 (Ala. Cr. ( A l a . Crim. App. 1990). When i t f i r s t trial court i n s t r u c t e d the jury regarding i n t e n t , the stated: "Now, l a d i e s a n d g e n t l e m e n , t h e c r i m e c h a r g e d i n t h i s c a s e , c r i m e s I s h o u l d s a y , i s a s e r i o u s cr i m e r: which r e q u i r e s proof of s p e c i f i c i n t e n t before the d e f e n d a n t c a n be c o n v i c t e d . S p e c i f i c i n t e n t , as t h e t e r m i m p l i e s , means more t h a n a g e n e r a l i n t e n t t o commit t h e a c t . To e s t a b l i s h s p e c i f i c i n t e n t , t h e S t a t e must p r o v e t h a t a d e f e n d a n t k n o w i n g l y d i d an 8 CR-08-0805 act let w h i c h t h e l a w f o r b i d s o r k n o w i n g l y -- I'm s o r r y , me r e a d t h a t a g a i n . "To e s t a b l i s h s p e c i f i c i n t e n t , t h e S t a t e must p r o v e t h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t k n o w i n g l y d i d an a c t w h i c h the law f o r b i d s , p u r p o s e l y i n t e n d e d t o v i o l a t e the law. Such i n t e n t may be d e t e r m i n e d f r o m a l l t h e f a c t s and c i r c u m s t a n c e s s u r r o u n d i n g t h e c a s e . " (R. 2445.) liability, When i t i n s t r u c t e d t h e j u r y r e g a r d i n g a c c o m p l i c e the t r i a l court stated: " [ L ] e t me t a l k t o y o u f o r j u s t a m i n u t e b e c a u s e t h e r e a r e a l l e g a t i o n s and t h e r e ' s been r e f e r e n c e made o f a i d i n g a n d a b e t t i n g , a c c o m p l i c e , c o m p l i c i t y , i f you w i l l . A person i s l e g a l l y accountable f o r the b e h a v i o r o f a n o t h e r p e r s o n c o n s t i t u t i n g a c r i m e if, with the intent t o promote o r a s s i s t t h e commission of the crime, he e i t h e r procures, i n d u c e s , o r c a u s e s s u c h o t h e r p e r s o n t o commit t h e crime; o r , a i d s o r abets such o t h e r person i n c o m m i t t i n g t h e c r i m e ; o r , has a l e g a l duty t o p r e v e n t t h e commission o f t h e crime and f a i l s t o make s u c h e f f o r t as he i s l e g a l l y r e q u i r e d t o make to p r e v e n t i t . "Now, a p e r s o n i s n o t l e g a l l y a c c o u n t a b l e f o r the behavior of another person c o n s t i t u t i n g the crime i f e i t h e r he's a v i c t i m o f t h a t crime o r t h e c r i m e i s d e f i n e d i n s u c h a way t h a t h i s c o n d u c t i s i n e v i t a b l y i n c i d e n t a l t o i t s commission; o r , b e f o r e the commission of the crime, he voluntarily t e r m i n a t e s h i s e f f o r t t o promote o r a s s i s t i t s c o m m i s s i o n a n d he g i v e s t i m e l y a n d a d e q u a t e w a r n i n g t o l a w e n f o r c e m e n t a u t h o r i t i e s ; o r , gave t i m e l y a n d adequate warning t o t h e i n t e n d e d v i c t i m ; o r , w h o l l y deprived h i s c o m p l i c i t y of i t s effectiveness i n the commission o f t h e crime. A n d t h e b u r d e n i s on t h e State t o prove that the defendant d i d not v o l u n t a r i l y t e r m i n a t e h i s e f f o r t t o promote o r a s s i s t the commission o f t h e crime charged." 9 CR-08-0805 (R. 2446-47.) When i t i n s t r u c t e d the indictment, jury i . e . , the c a p i t a l r o b b e r y of Lena, the t r i a l regarding offense Count I of the o f murder d u r i n g the court stated, i n part: "A p e r s o n a c t s i n t e n t i o n a l l y when i t i s h i s p u r p o s e t o c a u s e t h e d e a t h o f a n o t h e r p e r s o n . The i n t e n t t o k i l l must be r e a l , and i t must be s p e c i f i c . " (R. 2449.) I t also stated: "A p e r s o n a c t s i n t e n t i o n a l l y w i t h r e s p e c t t o a r e s u l t o r t o c o n d u c t when h i s o r h e r p u r p o s e i s t o c a u s e t h a t r e s u l t o r t o engage i n t h a t c o n d u c t . " (R. 2450.) When i t i n s t r u c t e d t h e indictment, i . e . , the jury regarding capital robbery of Shable, the t r i a l offense Count I I of the o f murder d u r i n g the court stated, i n part: "To c o n v i c t , t h e S t a t e must p r o v e b e y o n d a r e a s o n a b l e doubt each of the f o l l o w i n g elements of an i n t e n t i o n a l m u r d e r d u r i n g r o b b e r y i n t h e f i r s t degree: "That S h a b l e B e n e f i e l d i s dead. " T h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t , Mark Brown, c a u s e d t h e d e a t h , o r someone e l s e , as he a i d e d and a b e t t e d them, t h a t b e i n g , t o w i t , Shannon Wayne Brown o r Timothy P a t r i c k M o r r i s , caused the death of Shable B e n e f i e l d by s t r i k i n g h i m w i t h a b l u n t o b j e c t , t o wit, a b a s e b a l l b a t , and by c a u s i n g h i m t o i n h a l e p r o d u c t s of combustion from a f i r e . 10 CR-08-0805 "That i n c o m m i t t i n g t h e s e a c t s w h i c h c a u s e d t h e death of Shable B e n e f i e l d , the defendant i n t e n d e d t o k i l l the deceased, o r another person, or another i n d i v i d u a l who he a i d e d a n d a b e t t e d i n t e n d e d t o kill. "A p e r s o n a c t s i n t e n t i o n a l l y when i t i s h i s p u r p o s e t o c a u s e t h e d e a t h o f a n o t h e r p e r s o n . The intent to k i l l must be r e a l a n d i t must be specific." (R. 2458-59) (emphasis When i t i n s t r u c t e d indictment, added). the jury i . e . , the c a p i t a l r o b b e r y o f Reo, t h e t r i a l regarding Count I I I o f t h e o f f e n s e o f murder d u r i n g t h e court stated, i n part: "To c o n v i c t , t h e S t a t e must p r o v e b e y o n d a r e a s o n a b l e doubt each o f t h e f o l l o w i n g elements o f an i n t e n t i o n a l m u r d e r d u r i n g r o b b e r y i n t h e f i r s t degree: "That i n c o m m i t t i n g t h e a c t s w h i c h caused t h e d e a t h o f Reo B e n e f i e l d , t h e d e f e n d a n t i n t e n d e d -¬ the defendant, or another p a r t i c i p a n t , intended t o k i l l the deceased or another person. A person acts i n t e n t i o n a l l y when i t i s h i s p u r p o s e t o c a u s e t h e d e a t h o f a n o t h e r p e r s o n . The i n t e n t t o k i l l must be r e a l a n d i t must be s p e c i f i c . " (R. 2469-70) When (emphasis added). i t instructed the jury regarding Count V o f t h e i n d i c t m e n t , i . e . , t h e c a p i t a lo f f e n s e o f m u r d e r o f Lena d u r i n g a second-degree robbery, the t r i a l 11 court stated, i n part: CR-08-0805 "The d e f e n d a n t i s c h a r g e d w i t h c a p i t a l m u r d e r . The l a w s t a t e s t h a t an i n t e n t i o n a l m u r d e r c o m m i t t e d d u r i n g a b u r g l a r y i n t h e second degree i s c a p i t a l murder. A p e r s o n commits an i n t e n t i o n a l m u r d e r i f he c a u s e s t h e d e a t h o f a n o t h e r p e r s o n i n p e r f o r m i n g the a c t , or a c t s , which caused the death o f another p e r s o n , he o r a n o t h e r p a r t i c i p a n t i n t e n d s t o k i l l that person. "... To c o n v i c t , t h e S t a t e must p r o v e b e y o n d a r e a s o n a b l e doubt each o f t h e f o l l o w i n g elements o f an i n t e n t i o n a l m u r d e r d u r i n g a b u r g l a r y i n t h e second degree: " "That i n c o m m i t t i n g t h e a c t w h i c h caused t h e d e a t h o f Lena Maye B e n e f i e l d , t h e d e f e n d a n t i n t e n d e d to k i l l , o r a n o t h e r p a r t i c i p a n t , i n t e n d e d t o k i l l the deceased or another person. A person acts i n t e n t i o n a l l y when i t ' s h i s p u r p o s e t o c a u s e t h e d e a t h o f a n o t h e r p e r s o n . The i n t e n t t o k i l l must be r e a l a n d i t must be s p e c i f i c . " (R. 2487, 2488) (emphasis When i t i n s t r u c t e d indictment, during added). the jury i . e . , the c a p i t a l a second-degree regarding Count V I o f t h e o f f e n s e o f murder robbery, the t r i a l court of Shable stated, i n part: "Let me i n s e r t s o m e t h i n g w i l l s a v e me some w o r d s . i n this one, a n d i t "Understand, ladies and gentlemen, as t h e i n d i c t m e n t c h a r g e s , t h a t i t ' s n o t j u s t t h a t Mark Brown c o m m i t t e d t h a t o f f e n s e , b u t t h a t he a i d e d a n d abetted that offense. So when I s a y 'Mark Brown,' t h e n y o u c a n a l s o p u t i n t o t h a t a r e a t h o s e o t h e r two 12 CR-08-0805 i n d i v i d u a l s b e i n g Shannon Brown and T i m o t h y M o r r i s ; is that agreeable? Save me from r e a d i n g t h a t b e c a u s e t h e r e i s a c h a r g e t h a t he a i d e d and a b e t t e d , w h i c h i s an e l e m e n t o f t h e o f f e n s e t h a t must be s a t i s f i e d beyond a r e a s o n a b l e doubt. "So t o c o n v i c t , t h e S t a t e must p r o v e b e y o n d a r e a s o n a b l e doubt each of the f o l l o w i n g elements of an i n t e n t i o n a l m u r d e r d u r i n g a b u r g l a r y i n t h e second degree: " "That i n c o m m i t t i n g t h e a c t s w h i c h caused t h e death of Shable B e n e f i e l d , the defendant intended to k i l l the deceased, or another person. A person acts i n t e n t i o n a l l y when i t i s h i s p u r p o s e t o c a u s e t h e d e a t h o f a n o t h e r p e r s o n . The i n t e n t t o k i l l must be r e a l and i t must be s p e c i f i c . " (R. 2496-97.) During and V, and subsequent i t s instructions during with r e g a r d t o Counts i t s instructions counts, the t r i a l as to Count II, VI court improperly instructed III, and the j u r y t h a t i t c o u l d f i n d Brown g u i l t y o f c a p i t a l m u r d e r i f i t f o u n d t h a t he o r a n o t h e r p a r t i c i p a n t -- namely, or Timothy Morris another person. -- intended to killed the Shannon Brown deceased However, "[u]nder the accomplice l i a b i l i t y d o c t r i n e , a n o n t r i g g e r m a n a c c o m p l i c e may be c o n v i c t e d o f t h e c a p i t a l o f f e n s e o f d o u b l e m u r d e r o n l y i f he h a d t h e p a r t i c u l a r i z e d i n t e n t t h a t b o t h v i c t i m s be k i l l e d . Cf. Kennedy v. S t a t e , 472 So. 2d 1092 ( A l a . C r . App. 1 9 8 4 ) , a f f ' d , 472 So. 2d 1106 ( A l a . ) , c e r t . d e n i e d , 13 or CR-08-0805 474 U.S. 975, 106 S. C t . 340, 88 L. Ed. 2d 325 (1985). In a d d i t i o n , ' [ t ] o a f f i r m a f i n d i n g of a " p a r t i c u l a r i z e d i n t e n t t o k i l l " t h e j u r y must be p r o p e r l y c h a r g e d on t h e i n t e n t t o k i l l i s s u e . ' Ex p a r t e R a i n e s , 429 So. 2d 1111, 1113 (Ala. 1982), c e r t . d e n i e d , 460 U.S. 1103, 103 S. C t . 1804, 76 L. Ed. 2d 368 ( 1 9 8 3 ) ; see a l s o B a n k h e a d v. S t a t e , 585 So. 2d 97 (Ala. Cr. App. 1989), remanded on r e h e a r i n g on o t h e r g r o u n d s , 585 So. 2d 112 (Ala. 1991)." T o m l i n v. State, 591 So. A f t e r r e v i e w i n g the is clear jury that that the Brown trial could 2d 550, 557 to would have kill. c o u r t d i d not not Rather, allowed c a p i t a l offenses, intent to kill, the be the long as adequately inform convicted the of capital to find d i d not one p a r t i c u l a r i z e d i n t e n t to k i l l . of the murder specific, particularized above-referenced jury e v e n i f he as 1991). e n t i r e i n s t r u c t i o n s i n t h i s case, i t u n l e s s i t d e t e r m i n e d t h a t he had intent ( A l a . C r i m . App. Brown have t h e his instructions guilty of the particularized c o d e f e n d a n t s had Therefore, those the instructions were e r r o n e o u s . We further note that, during the State's closing argument, the p r o s e c u t o r s t a t e d : "Accountability f o r the b e h a v i o r of another. Y o u ' l l hear t h i s c a l l e d a l o t of t h i n g s . But i n A l a b a m a , as I t o l d you d u r i n g v o i r d i r e , y o u ' r e responsible f o r what o t h e r p e o p l e who are w o r k i n g w i t h you do. That's c a l l e d i n the indictments 14 CR-08-0805 a i d i n g and a b e t t i n g , i n a minute. and w e ' l l g e t t h a t definition "A p e r s o n i s legally accountable f o r the behavior of another c o n s t i t u t i n g a c r i m i n a l offense if, with t h e i n t e n t t o promote o r a s s i s t t h e c o m m i s s i o n o f t h e o f f e n s e , he p r o c u r e s , i n d u c e s , o r c a u s e s s u c h o t h e r p e r s o n t o commit t h e o f f e n s e . W e l l , who t a l k e d t h e s e two guys i n t o g o i n g up t o Reo B e n e f i e l d ' s h o u s e ? D i d you h e a r a n y t h i n g saying Shannon o r Tim M o r r i s h a d a c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e B e n e f i e l d s ? I t ' s Mark. He g o t them i n t o t h i s t o start with. He a i d s o r a b e t s , a n d a g a i n , I ' l l d e f i n e t h a t i n a m i n u t e , s u c h o t h e r p e r s o n in i c o m m i t t i n g t h e o f f e n s e , and h a v i n g a l e g a l d u t y to p r e v e n t t h e c o m m i s s i o n o f t h e o f f e n s e , he f a i l s t o make an e f f o r t he i s l e g a l l y r e q u i r e d t o make. T h a t ' s t h e i d e a o f r e n u n c i a t i o n . He g e t s i n t o t h i s , and he n e v e r t r i e s t o g e t o u t . D o e s n ' t show a n y t h i n g i n h i s a c t i o n s o r what we've h e a r d i n t h e e v i d e n c e t h a t i n d i c a t e s he w a n t e d o u t . "Aiding or abetting, that's i n the indictment, t h e j u d g e w i l l t a l k a b o u t i t . The words a i d a n d a b e t e n c o m p a s s e s a l l a s s i s t a n c e b y a c t s ; words o f encouragement; support; presence, actual, or constructive; rendering a i d should i t become necessary. A g a i n , i n my v o i r d i r e , I t a l k e d a b o u t t h e i d e a o f a l o o k o u t , g e t a w a y d r i v e r , gunman. "At t h a t p o i n t , a l l o f y ' a l l s a i d , e v e r y b o d y t h a t ' s on t h i s j u r y s a i d I c o u l d h o l d a l l o f them r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e a c t i v i t i e s o f t h e gunman b e c a u s e t h e y were a l l a c t i n g i n c o n c e r t w i t h e a c h o t h e r , a n d t h a t ' s what a i d i n g a n d a b e t t i n g t a l k s a b o u t . " F u r t h e r , a n o t h e r t e r m t h a t ' s u s e d f o r t h a t same t y p e o f c o n d u c t i s a c c o m p l i c e l i a b i l i t y . Any p e r s o n who a i d s o r a b e t s t h e c o m p l e t i o n o f a c r i m e t h r o u g h any a c t o f c o m m i s s i o n o r o m i s s i o n , a n d a g a i n , we t a l k a b o u t r e n u n c i a t i o n , i t ' s one t h i n g i f you h e l p commit t h e c r i m e , b u t i f you s t a n d b y i d l y a n d w a t c h 15 CR-08-0805 i t h a p p e n , y o u ' r e n o t d o i n g a n y t h i n g t o s t o p i t , so you c a n ' t s a y , l o o k , I d i d n ' t h i t t h a t p a r t i c u l a r p e r s o n and e x p e c t t h a t t o be a d e f e n s e . "He i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e c r i m i n a l a c t as h i s co-defendant. Rendering a i d can take place i n p l a n n i n g , s t r a t e g y , s u p p l y i n g necessary equipment l i k e a c a r . Mark Brown was t h e d r i v e r t h a t g o t them t h e r e , a c t i n g as a henchman, a l o o k o u t , o r a g e t a w a y driver. T h e r e i s no l o n g e r a l e g a l d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n p r i n c i p a l s and a c c e s s o r i e s i n A l a b a m a . As I t o l d y o u i n my v o i r d i r e , y o u ' r e i n f o r a p e n n y , y o u ' r e i n f o r a p o u n d , o r as Mark Brown s a i d when he t a l k e d t o N a t a l i e W a t k i n s , you s t a r t something t o g e t h e r , you f i n i s h i t t o g e t h e r . " I n t e n t , we h e a r d t h a t , a n d t h a t i s one t h i n g t h a t ' s r e q u i r e d i n t h e l a w f o r you t o p r o v e w i t h t h e m a j o r i t y o f c r i m e s we h a v e i n T i t l e 13. A person must a c t w i t h i n t e n t . You d o n ' t a c c i d e n t a l l y r o b somebody; you d o n ' t a c c i d e n t a l l y k i l l somebody a n d get charged w i t h C a p i t a l Murder. "The q u i r k h e r e i s Mark Brown's i n t e n t , b e c a u s e of t h e a c c o m p l i c e l i a b i l i t y s t a t u t e and a l l t h e t h i n g s you've j u s t l i s t e n e d t o , a t t i m e s i s t h e i n t e n t of h i s buddies. I f y o u s i g n on f o r a r o b b e r y and you i n t e n d t o commit t h a t r o b b e r y a n d you b r i n g two guys w i t h you a n d you want them t o commit t h a t r o b b e r y w i t h you a n d one o f them d e c i d e s I'm g o i n g to k i l l somebody d u r i n g this r o b b e r y and t h e y intended t o commit t h a t m u r d e r , y o u g o t t h e i r intent. You're a l l i n together. "A p e r s o n i n t e n d s t h e n a t u r a l c o n s e q u e n c e s o f their actions. I f you s w i n g a b a s e b a l l b a t a t somebody's h e a d , what do you i n t e n d ? You may i n f e r i n t e n t c i r c u m s t a n t i a l l y through the actions of the d e f e n d a n t o r t h e c o - d e f e n d a n t . And we t a l k e d a b o u t t h a t i n v o i r d i r e , what c i r c u m s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e i s . We have d i r e c t e v i d e n c e i n t h i s c a s e , t h e v i d e o s , the statements, d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s are a v a i l a b l e t o 16 CR-08-0805 you. B u t you can i n f e r c e r t a i n t h i n g s , and we've t a l k e d a b o u t t h e i d e a o f was Mark Brown r e m o r s e f u l f o r what he d i d ? Watch t h o s e v i d e o s . See i f he seemed u p s e t a b o u t i t t o you. "The i n t e n t o f a p e r s o n a i d i n g o r a b e t t i n g an o f f e n s e i s t h a t o f h i s c o - d e f e n d a n t s , and h i s i n t e n t i s t h a t h i s c o - d e f e n d a n t s ' w i l l w i l l be c a r r i e d o u t . "You may i n f e r i n t e n t t h r o u g h t h e p o s s e s s i o n , b r a n d i s h i n g , o r use o f weapons, r e s t r a i n t s a n d / o r starting that f i r e . What do you i n t e n d when you have f o u r p e o p l e i n t h e h o u s e and you l i g h t t h e h o u s e on f i r e ? " (R. 2368-70.) Also, during argument, the p r o s e c u t o r the State's rebuttal closing stated: "What one d o e s , we a l l do, and we s h o u l d be h e l d a c c o u n t a b l e and r e s p o n s i b l e f o r what e a c h o f us do i n c o n c e r t w i t h one a n o t h e r . And i n one o f h i s s t a t e m e n t s , he s a i d , 'Once I g o t my s h a r e p a r t , ' 'Once I g o t my s h a r e p a r t . ' He was i n i t t h e w h o l e way, and I a s k you t o f i n d him g u i l t y and I a s k you t o g i v e him j u s t i c e and I a s k you t o b i n d him t o h i s c r i m e . C o m p l e t e t h e t i e t h a t b i n d s him to h i s crime. Thank y o u . " (R. 2432.) The found g u i l t y S t a t e i n c o r r e c t l y a r g u e d t h a t Brown c o u l d o f c a p i t a l m u r d e r , e v e n i f he d i d not r e q u i s i t e i n t e n t to k i l l , as l o n g as one of h i s had the or the intent Therefore, statements reliability as to kill Brown during deceased correctly argues, c l o s i n g argument of h i s c o n v i c t i o n s . 17 further the codefendants another the have be person. prosecutor's undermined the CR-08-0805 B a s e d on the trial c o u r t ' s i n s t r u c t i o n s , the have f o u n d Brown g u i l t y o f commit another felony, degree b u r g l a r y , jury c a p i t a l m u r d e r i f he i.e., first-degree second-degree b u r g l a r y , could intended robbery, to first- or arson, but d i d i n t e n d t o k i l l the deceased or a n o t h e r p e r s o n . Therefore, instructions intent not for the the offense issue did not clearly distinguish the o f f e n s e of c a p i t a l murder from the of before felony-murder. the jury m u r d e r b e c a u s e he was Brown w h e t h e r he intended to k i l l the that victims g u i l t y o f f e l o n y - m u r d e r b e c a u s e he d i d n o t the victims. also o n l y i n t e n d e d t o rob to kill them. them and Because e f f e c t i v e l y abolished and contends that felony-murder, any we d i d not trial State, 572 So. 2d ( f i n d i n g t h a t t h e r e was intend capital to he kill that have any court's he reason instructions d i s t i n c t i o n between c a p i t a l murder cannot f i n d that t h o s e i n s t r u c t i o n s r e g a r d i n g i n t e n t was v. sole or whether h i s d e f e n s e was t h a t he the the g u i l t y of was He element i n t e n t element f o r argues was the 1288, 1293 the error harmless. (Ala. Crim. p l a i n e r r o r where " t h e in giving See Russaw App. 1990) instructions of t h e t r i a l c o u r t [were] h i g h l y c o n f u s i n g b e c a u s e o f t h e f a i l u r e to clearly distinguish the intent 18 element i n the crimes of CR-08-0805 c a p i t a l murder, felony-murder, the d o c t r i n e o f accomplice For and murder i n c o n n e c t i o n liability"). the above-stated reasons, we c o n c l u d e that Brown's c o n v i c t i o n s must be r e v e r s e d b e c a u s e t h e t r i a l gave e r r o n e o u s i n s t r u c t i o n s r e g a r d i n g i n t e n t . reverse the t r i a l proceedings with court's court A c c o r d i n g l y , we j u d g m e n t a n d remand t h i s that are consistent with this a l l of case f o r opinion. APPLICATION FOR REHEARING OVERRULED; OPINION OF JULY 30, 2010, WITHDRAWN; OPINION SUBSTITUTED; W e l c h , Windom, K e l l u m , REVERSED AND REMANDED. and Main, J J . , concur. 19

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.