Jeffery Tyrone Riggs v. State of Alabama

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 05/03/2013 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o formal 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 , Alabama 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 be 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, 2012-2013 CR-09-1349 J e f f e r y Tyrone Riggs v. S t a t e o f Alabama Appeal from J e f f e r s o n C i r c u i t (CC-08-1838) Court WINDOM, P r e s i d i n g J u d g e . Jeffery conviction Tyrone Riggs and sentence appeals of death. his Riggs capital-murder was c o n v i c t e d o f m u r d e r made c a p i t a l f o r t a k i n g t h e l i f e o f N o r b e r Payne d u r i n g the course of a burglary. See § 1 3 A - 5 - 4 0 ( a ) ( 4 ) , Ala. Code CR-09-1349 1975. The j u r y , b y a v o t e o f 1 0 - 2 , recommended t h a t R i g g s be sentenced to l i f e i n p r i s o n without the p o s s i b i l i t y of parole. After weighing mitigating the aggravating circumstances, the circumstances circuit court and the rejected the j u r y ' s recommendation and s e n t e n c e d R i g g s t o d e a t h . 26, 2010, R i g g s filed hearing, the c i r c u i t a motion f o r new t r i a l . court denied Riggs's On July Following a motion. Facts Riggs and relationship Norber for several Payne had been involved years before her death. in a I n 2005, R i g g s b o u g h t a h o u s e a n d a s k e d Payne a n d h e r d a u g h t e r s t o move in w i t h him. Approximately two y e a r s later, Payne and h e r d a u g h t e r s moved o u t o f R i g g s ' s house a n d i n t o an a p a r t m e n t i n Center Point. apartment Payne was t h e o n l y i n d i v i d u a l 1 lease. listed on t h e I n 2 0 0 7 , R i g g s moved i n t o t h e a p a r t m e n t with Payne a n d h e r f a m i l y . According their mother to Payne's ended her daughters, relationship Natasha with and Riggs Tiffany, after an There i s c o n f l i c t i n g evidence r e g a r d i n g the exact date and r e a s o n Payne a n d h e r d a u g h t e r s moved o u t o f R i g g s ' s h o u s e ; for i n s t a n c e , Payne's daughter Natasha t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e y moved o u t a n d i n t o t h e i r own a p a r t m e n t b e c a u s e some o f h e r m o t h e r ' s j e w e l r y was m i s s i n g . (R. 484-85.) 1 2 CR-09-1349 argument i n O c t o b e r Tiffany testified 2007 b e t w e e n Payne, R i g g s , and that she overheard R i g g s and Payne and w a l k e d Riggs let go c h o k i n g Payne. of Payne, an Tiffany. altercation between i n t o h e r m o t h e r ' s bedroom t o find Tiffany repeatedly h i t Riggs u n t i l he and grabbed then Tiffany he the neck. the p o l i c e , but A f t e r w a r d s , Payne t o l d T i f f a n y t o c a l l by 2 Riggs t h r e a t e n e d t o " s h o o t [ t h e m ] " i f she p i c k e d up t h e t e l e p h o n e . (R. 618.) Riggs further tonight." (R. 618.) stated Later that that they night, were " g o n n a die Payne, Natasha, and T i f f a n y p a c k e d up R i g g s ' s p e r s o n a l b e l o n g i n g s i n a p l a s t i c b i n and took them t o h i s m o t h e r ' s h o u s e . After R i g g s no l o n g e r s l e p t a t t h e a p a r t m e n t . testified that during the m u r d e r , R i g g s d i d n o t pay l i v e w i t h them i n t h e Approximately a three months incident, and Tiffany preceding Payne's and d i d n o t apartment. week before the murder, a break-in d u r i n g which the back door l o c k i n g mechanism were damaged. the apartment Natasha rent or u t i l i t y b i l l s , o c c u r r e d a t Payne's apartment, its this and When Payne r e t u r n e d t o and saw t h e damage, she f e a r e d t h a t someone was N a t a s h a t e s t i f i e d t h a t she h a d a good r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h R i g g s b u t t h a t he and T i f f a n y h a d n e v e r g o t t e n a l o n g . (R. 477, 479.) 2 3 CR-09-1349 inside the apartment, and she R i g g s wedged a c h a i r u n d e r n e a t h fix f o r t h e damaged l o c k . On the a telephoned Riggs t h e d o o r k n o b as a for help. temporary (R. 452-54.) 3 t h e e v e n i n g o f J a n u a r y 9, 2008, Payne was working at B u r g e r K i n g f a s t - f o o d r e s t a u r a n t i n Roebuck, where she general Natasha, manager. who Around worked at 10:00 p.m., another Payne telephoned King fast-food Burger r e s t a u r a n t , and a s k e d h e r t o h e l p c l o s e t h e s t o r e b e c a u s e were short-staffed Natasha and her at the boyfriend, Roebuck Kenny was store. Shortly Williams, arrived they after at the Roebuck B u r g e r K i n g , R i g g s p u l l e d i n t o the p a r k i n g l o t t o drop off Payne's g r a n d d a u g h t e r , J a n i a h , whom he o f t e n l o o k e d a f t e r w h i l e Payne and h e r d a u g h t e r s were w o r k i n g . the restaurant Natasha, and until Payne was J a n i a h were g e t t i n g ready into to Riggs remained at leave. their As vehicle, a s k e d Payne t o s t e p o u t o f t h e c a r so t h e y c o u l d t a l k . Payne, Riggs Payne T h e r e was c o n f l i c t i n g e v i d e n c e r e g a r d i n g t h e c o n d i t i o n of t h e d o o r k n o b as a r e s u l t o f t h e b u r g l a r y . Specifically, N a t a s h a t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e d e a d b o l t was b r o k e n b u t t h a t t h e d o o r k n o b was s t i l l a t t a c h e d , w h i l e R i g g s t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e d o o r frame was damaged and t h a t t h e d o o r k n o b was c o m p l e t e l y b r o k e n o f f and l y i n g on t h e f l o o r when he a r r i v e d . (R. 452-54, 1354.) R i g g s f u r t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t he p l a c e d a n a i l i n t h e bottom of the door t o h o l d i t c l o s e d . (R. 1359.) 3 4 CR-09-1349 and Riggs talked briefly v e h i c l e with Natasha. before Payne got back On t h e r i d e home, P a y n e t o l d t h a t " s h e d i d n ' t want [ R i g g s ] b a c k i n h e r h o u s e . " Payne, Natasha, and J a n i a h arrived a r o u n d 1:30 a.m. on J a n u a r y 10, 2008. home a n d i n b e d . with Riggs t e l l i n g into Natasha the Natasha (R. 437.) at their apartment T i f f a n y was a l r e a d y a t o v e r h e a r d P a y n e on t h e t e l e p h o n e him t h a t she was g e t t i n g ready f o r bed. N a t a s h a was i n h e r room when she h e a r d P a y n e c a l l i n g f o r h e r from h e r bedroom. " l o u d boom" open. Several moments (R. 653) t h a t s o u n d e d later, like Tiffany heard a t h e door b e i n g k i c k e d S h o r t l y t h e r e a f t e r , N a t a s h a saw " [ R i g g s ] r u n n i n g down t h e h a l l w i t h a gun i n h i s hand." (R. 464.) N a t a s h a t h e n saw Riggs bedroom, and go into approximately four her mother's gunshots. Moments 4 later, R i g g s r u n b a c k down t h e h a l l a n d o u t t h e b a c k A t 2:18 a.m., he wanted Natasha saw door. A t 2:24 a.m., R i g g s t e l e p h o n e d o f f i c e f r o m h i s mother's to turn heard N a t a s h a d i a l e d emergency 911 a n d r e p o r t e d t h a t h e r mother had been s h o t . the s h e r i f f ' s she himself house and s t a t e d i n t o law enforcement. that Sergeant N a t a s h a t e s t i f i e d t h a t she b e l i e v e d s h e h e a r d f o u r gunshots f o l l o w e d by a " l i t t l e n o i s e . " (R. 517.) She f u r t h e r s t a t e d t h a t i t sounded l i k e " [ R i g g s w a s ] s t i l l t r y i n g t o s h o o t , b u t t h e r e [ w e r e ] no b u l l e t s coming o u t . " (R. 517.) 4 5 CR-09-1349 C l y d e Money, a l o n g w i t h t h r e e o t h e r d e p u t i e s , d r o v e read h i s Miranda 5 rights. Sergeant the taken i n t o custody R i g g ' s m o t h e r ' s h o u s e where R i g g s was to and Money a s k e d Riggs about h i s gun, and R i g g s d e s c r i b e d h i s gun and t h e l o c a t i o n where he placed it. search their lived R i g g s ' s p a r e n t s gave Sergeant h o u s e f o r t h e weapon and t h e r e i n t h e house w i t h them. Riggs's statement, evidence. the gun was A f t e r w a r d s , R i g g s was Money c o n s e n t indicated that (R. 738-39.) recovered and to Riggs Based taken taken to a s h e r i f f ' s on into office for questioning. A t t h e s h e r i f f ' s o f f i c e , R i g g s was rights, and he again read h i s Miranda signed a waiver-of-rights form. Riggs gave S e r g e a n t M i k e House h i s o r a l s t a t e m e n t w h i c h was and a written statement, Payne back t o the i n which apartment, he admitted to to k i c k i n g a f t e r P a y n e slammed i t i n h i s f a c e , evidence collected revealed that tread pattern the from Miranda v. A r i z o n a , 384 U.S. 6 following open t o f o l l o w i n g Payne into Riggs and (R. 857.) the o f a shoe p r i n t Payne's back door matched the t r e a d p r i n t 5 recorded the back door h e r bedroom, and t o s h o o t i n g h e r w i t h h i s gun. physical then 436 crime taken o f t h e shoe (1966). The scene from Riggs CR-09-1349 was wearing at Additionally, and found collected Payne's the time he was taken into custody. t h e b l o o d f o u n d on R i g g s ' s c l o t h i n g was t o be Payne's. four spent bedroom. c o n t a i n e d one (R. shell I t was live 863.) casings also Evidence and two determined technicians live that tested rounds in Riggs's gun round. D u r i n g the course of the i n v e s t i g a t i o n , Terrance Battle p r o v i d e d i n v e s t i g a t o r s w i t h h i s c e l l u l a r t e l e p h o n e and s e v e r a l digital voice-mail recordings l e f t by Riggs. B a t t l e , he b e g a n w o r k i n g w i t h Payne i n A u g u s t According 2006. to Within a few weeks, B a t t l e l e a r n e d t h a t Payne was no l o n g e r l i v i n g w i t h h e r b o y f r i e n d and had moved t o C e n t e r P o i n t . The romantic December Battle from relationship i n October r e c e i v e d a telephone a male, who called the caller hung up. In c a l l b e t w e e n 5:00 himself "Jeff." w h e t h e r B a t t l e h a d s e e n Payne. and 2007. two b e g a n a and The 2007, 6:30 caller a.m. asked B a t t l e r e p l i e d t h a t he h a d Approximately one month l a t e r , not in J a n u a r y 2008, B a t t l e r e c e i v e d a n o t h e r t e l e p h o n e c a l l f r o m t h e same number, during which the caller threatened " [ P a y n e ] came b a c k t o B a t t l e ' s h o u s e , s o m e t h i n g to her." Battle (R. 814-15.) r e c e i v e d two In addition v o i c e m a i l s on 7 that i f would happen to the telephone calls, January and 5, 2008, a CR-09-1349 third voice mail second v o i c e on January 7, 2008. After receiving m a i l , B a t t l e t e l e p h o n e d Payne t o t e l l " J e f f " had l e f t a t h r e a t e n i n g message, t o w h i c h she that was] "he[ f o l l o w i n g [ h e r ] " and [ B a t t l e ] back later." (R. 819.) "[she Battle received call from Riggs, asked about relationship during with that responded would] Approximately later, Battle's that her the call one week which Riggs Payne. Battle t e s t i f i e d t h a t he " b l e w [ R i g g s ] o f f " and had n o t s p o k e n t o or r e t u r n e d The any messages s i n c e t h a t day. autopsy revealed that g u n s h o t wound t o h e r c h e s t . t h e r e were had w i t h the wound on of the i n d i c a t i n g that particularly P a y n e ' s b a c k was r e s u l t of a that f o u n d i n h e r bedroom. Payne was gun. wounds shot at had close (R. signs of range A d d i t i o n a l l y , the or exit c l a s s i f i e d as a " s h o r t e x i t wound" (R. 1 1 4 1 ) , l e a d i n g t h e m e d i c a l was a f o u r e x i t wounds, c o n s i s t e n t gunshot powerful as 821.) autopsy f u r t h e r revealed f o u r e n t r a n c e and Several stippling, a The four spent s h e l l casings 1131-32.) with Payne d i e d (R. him most l i k e l y l y i n g i n b e d e x a m i n e r t o c o n c l u d e t h a t Payne o r f a l l i n g i n t o bed when she was shot. After defense. the State rested, Riggs testified in his R i g g s s t a t e d t h a t he b o u g h t a house i n 2005 and 8 own that CR-09-1349 he a s k e d Payne a n d h e r d a u g h t e r s t o move i n t o t h e h o u s e him. with R i g g s a d m i t t e d t h a t t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p was n o t p e r f e c t and t h a t o v e r t h e y e a r s he a n d Payne h a d h a d s e v e r a l a r g u m e n t s d u r i n g w h i c h t h e y t h r e a t e n e d t o t h r o w one a n o t h e r o u t o f t h e house. (R. threatening 1289-90.) voice-mail Riggs messages also admitted on B a t t l e ' s to cell leaving phone b u t s t a t e d t h a t he i n t e n d e d o n l y t o s c a r e B a t t l e . R i g g s t e s t i f i e d t h a t he e n c o u n t e r e d f i n a n c i a l p r o b l e m s i n 2007 a n d h i s house went i n t o f o r e c l o s u r e . Payne leased application in because name o f the ongoing Riggs's foreclosure f u r n i t u r e f o r the R i g g s s t a t e d t h a t he l i v e d i n t h e a p a r t m e n t , portion of the rent and u t i l i t i e s , 1308.) kept Additionally, who t e s t i f i e d that until (R. 1231-32, 1 2 5 1 , 1272¬ the defense presented R i g g s was s t i l l 9 paid h i s personal a n d h a d h i s own k e y t o t h e a p a r t m e n t P a y n e ' s d e a t h on J a n u a r y 10, 2008. witnesses after R i g g s t e s t i f i e d t h a t he moved i n t o t h e a p a r t m e n t belongings there, 73, her Payne a n d t h a t he h a d h e l p e d p u r c h a s e apartment. a apartment was d e n i e d proceedings. with an According to Riggs, living several i nthe CR-09-1349 apartment killed. with Payne on t h e m o r n i n g t h a t Payne was s h o t a n d 6 R i g g s t e s t i f i e d t h a t on t h e e v e n i n g o f P a y n e ' s d e a t h , he brought J a n i a h t o Burger K i n g f a s t - f o o d r e s t a u r a n t and w a i t e d as N a t a s h a a n d Payne f i n i s h e d c l e a n i n g t h e s t o r e . Burger K i n g and drove t o h i s mother's house. Riggs left Riggs telephoned Payne a n d t o l d h e r t h a t he w a n t e d t o work t h i n g s o u t a n d t h a t they needed t o t a l k . R i g g s was s t i l l on t h e t e l e p h o n e Payne when he a r r i v e d a t t h e a p a r t m e n t . he was a t t h e b a c k d o o r . R i g g s t o l d Payne t h a t Payne, d r e s s e d i n n o t h i n g b u t h e r underwear, c r a c k e d t h e door so t h e y c o u l d t a l k . questioning However, h e r about when Riggs with the status attempted to of their ask R i g g s began relationship. Payne about her r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h B a t t l e , Payne slammed t h e d o o r i n h i s f a c e , s t r i k i n g R i g g s i n t h e eye and c a u s i n g him t o f a l l back and h i t h i s head. After (R. 1372-73.) Payne s t r u c k h i m w i t h door w i t h h i s l e f t f o o t , chair. forcing the door, Riggs kicked the i t open a n d k n o c k i n g o v e r a Payne s t o r m e d o f f down t h e h a l l w a y t o w a r d t h e bedroom R i g g s ' s mother, P a t r i c i a , and h i s son, J e f f e r y R i g g s , J r . , and h i s aunt, Sharon H i l l , a l l t e s t i f i e d t h a t Riggs l i v e d i n t h e a p a r t m e n t w i t h Payne f r o m t h e t i m e he l o s t h i s home u n t i l t h e n i g h t Payne was k i l l e d . (R. 1 2 3 1 , 1250-51, 1273.) 6 10 CR-09-1349 and R i g g s f o l l o w e d h e r . into the bedroom, (R. 1374.) where the " s c r e a m i n g " a t one a n o t h e r . that the room was dark, t e l e v i s i o n , w h i c h was on. two The argument c o n t i n u e d began (R. 1390.) except (R. "hollering" Riggs l a t e r f o r the 1389.) glare and When Payne t u r n e d a r o u n d , "something b e l i e v e d was shining" a knife. 7 down, b u t she d i d n o t . approached was about Riggs. (R. Riggs testified from the A t some p o i n t d u r i n g t h e a r g u m e n t , Payne p u t h e r knee up on t h e b e d and an o b j e c t . and Riggs 1388-89), retrieved "[saw] a handle" which he said he asked Payne t o p u t t h e o b j e c t Payne t h e n c l i m b e d o f f t h e b e d and A c c o r d i n g t o R i g g s , he b e l i e v e d t h a t Payne to stab him; therefore, he r e a c h e d f o r t h e gun he h a d i n h i s p a n t s and b e g a n s h o o t i n g . Riggs c o u l d not r e c a l l how many t i m e s he s h o t , b u t s t a t e d t h a t he s t o p p e d f i r i n g when he saw Payne l y i n g on h e r s i d e . (R. 1393.) Standard of Review B e c a u s e R i g g s has been s e n t e n c e d t o d e a t h , a c c o r d i n g t o R u l e 45A, A l a . R. App. P., t h i s C o u r t must s e a r c h t h e r e c o r d for "plain error." 7 fork. R u l e 45A R i g g s l a t e r acknowledged (R. 1408-09.) states: t h a t t h e o b j e c t was a c t u a l l y a 11 CR-09-1349 " I n a l l cases 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 under review, whether or not brought to the a t t e n t i o n o f t h e t r i a l c o u r t , and t a k e a p p r o p r i a t e a p p e l l a t e a c t i o n by reason t h e r e o f , whenever such e r r o r has o r p r o b a b l y h a s 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 of the a p p e l l a n t . " (Emphasis added.) In Ex parte Brown, A l a b a m a Supreme C o u r t 11 So. 3d 933 ( A l a . 2008), explained: "'"To r i s e t o t h e l e v e l o f p l a i n e r r o r , t h e c l a i m e d e r r o r must n o t o n l y s e r i o u s l y a f f e c t a d e f e n d a n t ' s ' s u b s t a n t i a l r i g h t s , ' b u t i t must a l s o have an u n f a i r p r e j u d i c i a l i m p a c t on t h e j u r y ' s deliberations."' Ex p a r t e B r y a n t , 951 So. 2d 724, 727 ( A l a . 2002) ( q u o t i n g Hyde v. S t a t e , 778 So. 2d 199, 209 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1 9 9 8 ) ) . In United States v. Young, 470 U.S. 1, 15, 105 S. C t . 1038, 84 L. E d . 2d 1 (1985), t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s Supreme Court, construing the f e d e r a l p l a i n - e r r o r r u l e , stated: "'The R u l e a u t h o r i z e s t h e C o u r t s o f A p p e a l s to c o r r e c t only " p a r t i c u l a r l y egregious e r r o r s , " U n i t e d S t a t e s v. F r a d y , 456 U.S. 152, 163 (1982), those errors that " s e r i o u s l y a f f e c t the f a i r n e s s , i n t e g r i t y or public reputation of judicial p r o c e e d i n g s , " U n i t e d S t a t e s v. A t k i n s o n , 297 U.S. [ 1 5 7 ] , a t 160 [ ( 1 9 3 6 ) ] . I n o t h e r words, the p l a i n - e r r o r e x c e p t i o n t o the c o n t e m p o r a n e o u s - o b j e c t i o n r u l e i s t o be "used sparingly, solely in those circumstances i n which a m i s c a r r i a g e of j u s t i c e would otherwise r e s u l t . " United S t a t e s v. F r a d y , 456 U.S., a t 163, n. 14.' "See a l s o Ex p a r t e Hodges, 856 So. 2d 936, ( A l a . 2003) ( r e c o g n i z i n g t h a t p l a i n e r r o r 12 947-48 exists the CR-09-1349 only i f failure to r e c o g n i z e the e r r o r would ' s e r i o u s l y a f f e c t the f a i r n e s s or i n t e g r i t y of the j u d i c i a l p r o c e e d i n g s , ' and t h a t t h e p l a i n - e r r o r d o c t r i n e i s t o be 'used s p a r i n g l y , s o l e l y i n t h o s e circumstances i n which a m i s c a r r i a g e of j u s t i c e w o u l d o t h e r w i s e r e s u l t ' ( i n t e r n a l q u o t a t i o n marks omitted))." 11 So. claim 3d at under 938. the "The standard of plain-error doctrine review i n reviewing is stricter s t a n d a r d u s e d i n r e v i e w i n g an i s s u e t h a t was in t h e t r i a l c o u r t o r on a p p e a l . " 113, 121 ( A l a . C r i m . App. object w i l l not bar t h i s 1999). than properly H a l l v. S t a t e , 820 a the raised So. 2d While Riggs's f a i l u r e to C o u r t f r o m r e v i e w i n g any w i l l w e i g h a g a i n s t any c l a i m o f p r e j u d i c e . 600 So. 2d 343 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1 9 9 1 ) . issue, i t See D i l l v. S t a t e , Discussion I. On a p p e a l , R i g g s a r g u e s t h a t t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t r e v e r s i b l e e r r o r by f a i l i n g committed t o a c c u r a t e l y charge the j u r y on p r o v o k e d h e a t o f p a s s i o n as i t a p p l i e d t o h i s c a p i t a l - m u r d e r charge. Specifically, he contends that circuit court's i n s t r u c t i o n on c a p i t a l m u r d e r f a i l e d t o i n c l u d e t h e critical n e g a t i v e element, which r e q u i r e s the S t a t e t o prove beyond a reasonable doubt "'[t]hat the defendant was not lawfully p r o v o k e d t o do t h e a c t w h i c h c a u s e d t h e d e a t h o f t h e d e c e a s e d 13 CR-09-1349 by a sudden h e a t o f p a s s i o n . ' " 1024, 1033 Instructions (Ala. - 2004) Riggs the court's this circuit failed i s s u e w i l l be A l a . R. At App. (quoting Criminal, omitted)). Ex p a r t e M c G r i f f , pp. 6-8 Alabama (3d to request failure reviewed s u c h an and ed. 908 So. Pattern 1994) failed Jury (emphasis to object instruction; for p l a i n error only. 2d to therefore, Rule 45A, P. trial, the circuit i n s t r u c t i o n s regarding Riggs's court gave capital-murder the following charge: "Now, l a d i e s and g e n t l e m e n , t h i s D e f e n d a n t i s charged w i t h the o f f e n s e of C a p i t a l Murder. As I mentioned before, the indictment alleges that J e f f e r y Tyrone R i g g s , d i d i n t e n t i o n a l l y cause the d e a t h o f N o r b e r Payne, by s h o o t i n g h e r w i t h a pistol. And J e f f e r y T y r o n e R i g g s c a u s e d s a i d d e a t h d u r i n g t h e t i m e t h a t he k n o w i n g l y and u n l a w f u l l y e n t e r e d or remained or attempted to u n l a w f u l l y e n t e r or to remain u n l a w f u l l y i n the d w e l l i n g of Norber Payne w i t h t h e i n t e n t t o commit t h e c r i m e o f m u r d e r , therein. "And w h i l e e f f e c t i n g e n t r y , J e f f r e y T y r o n e R i g g s was armed w i t h a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument to w i t a p i s t o l i n v i o l a t i o n of S e c t i o n 1 3 A - 5 - 4 0 ( a ) ( 4 ) [ , A l a . Code 1 9 7 5 ] . "Of course, the Defendant i s charged with Capital Murder. And the law states that an i n t e n t i o n a l murder [committed] d u r i n g a b u r g l a r y i n the f i r s t - d e g r e e i s C a p i t a l Murder. 14 CR-09-1349 "So you have two i n t e n t i o n a l m u r d e r . And first-degree. c o m p o n e n t s . You have an you have a b u r g l a r y i n t h e "The l a w s a y s t h a t a p e r s o n commits t h e c r i m e o f m u r d e r i f he i n t e n t i o n a l l y c a u s e s t h e d e a t h o f another person. And i n p e r f o r m i n g t h e a c t s w h i c h c a u s e d t h a t d e a t h , he i n t e n d s t o k i l l t h a t p e r s o n . I ' l l say t h a t a g a i n . "The law says that a person 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 and i n p e r f o r m i n g t h e a c t o r a c t s w h i c h c a u s e d t h e d e a t h o f t h a t p e r s o n [ , he] i n t e n d s to k i l l t h a t o t h e r p e r s o n . "A p e r s o n commits a b u r g l a r y i n t h e f i r s t - d e g r e e i f he k n o w i n g l y , and u n l a w f u l l y e n t e r s o r r e m a i n s u n l a w f u l l y i n a d w e l l i n g and he does so w i t h t h e i n t e n t t o commit a c r i m e t h e r e i n . And while e f f e c t i n g e n t r y , or w h i l e i n the d w e l l i n g , or i n the immediate flight t h e r e f r o m , he causes physical i n j u r y to another person. "So -- and t h i s i s what you need t o make n o t e o f b e c a u s e t h e S t a t e must p r o v e e a c h one o f t h e s e f o l l o w [ i n g ] elements beyond a r e a s o n a b l e doubt. " F i r s t , i n o r d e r t o c o n v i c t the Defendant C a p i t a l Murder, t h e S t a t e must p r o v e b e y o n d r e a s o n a b l e doubt the f o l l o w i n g elements: "First, of a t h a t N o r b e r Payne i s dead. "Secondly, t h a t the Defendant. Caused death. By s h o o t i n g h e r . W i t h a p i s t o l . her " T h a t t h e D e f e n d a n t c a u s e d h e r d e a t h by s h o o t i n g her w i t h a p i s t o l . " T h i r d l y , t h a t i n committing the acts which caused her death, the Defendant i n t e n d e d t o k i l l 15 CR-09-1349 her. T h a t ' s a f a n c y way o f s a y i n g t h a t when he s h o t h e r , he must have i n t e n d e d t o k i l l h e r . "The l a w s a y s t h a t 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 a t r e s u l t . Or h i s p u r p o s e t o engage i n t h a t c o n d u c t . "The i n t e n t t o k i l l , r e a l and s p e c i f i c . i n this c h a r g e , must be "In o t h e r words, you must find that the Defendant specifically intended to k i l l Norber Payne. Do y o u a l l f o l l o w me? "(No v e r b a l response.) "THE COURT: Okay. "That's t h e t h i r d element. "Specific intent. "To kill Ms. Payne. "Fourthly, the forth element i s that the D e f e n d a n t must have e i t h e r k n o w i n g l y e n t e r e d . Or remained u n l a w f u l l y . I n t h e d w e l l i n g o f Ms. Payne. "(Pause.) "THE COURT: F i f t h , that i n doing so, the D e f e n d a n t a c t e d w i t h t h e i n t e n t t o commit a c r i m e , namely murder. "(Pause.) "THE COURT: So t h e S t a t e must c o n v i n c e y o u t h a t when he e i t h e r k n o w i n g l y e n t e r e d t h a t d w e l l i n g , o r when he r e m a i n e d u n l a w f u l l y i n t h a t d w e l l i n g . T h a t he d i d s o , a c t i n g w i t h t h e i n t e n t t o commit t h e crime o f murder. "(Pause.) 16 CR-09-1349 "THE COURT: S i x t h , t h a t w h i l e t h e D e f e n d a n t was i n t h e d w e l l i n g . The D e f e n d a n t caused p h y s i c a l i n j u r y t o N o r b e r Payne. " T h a t w h i l e he was i n t h e d w e l l i n g , o r i n e f f e c t i n g e n t r y t h e r e t o , o r i n t h e immediate f l i g h t t h e r e f r o m , t h e Defendant caused p h y s i c a l i n j u r y t o N o r b e r Payne. "And l a s t l y , number s e v e n . The s e v e n t h e l e m e n t i s t h a t t h e murder t o o k p l a c e d u r i n g a b u r g l a r y . "As I've p r e v i o u s l y d e f i n e d t h a t c o n c e p t t o y o u . "That t h e murder t o o k p l a c e d u r i n g t h e b u r g l a r y . " . . . "So i f y o u f i n d f r o m t h e e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e S t a t e has p r o v e d b e y o n d a r e a s o n a b l e d o u b t e a c h one o f these seven elements. You s h a l l convict the Defendant o f C a p i t a l Murder. " I f you f i n d t h a t t h e S t a t e h a s n o t p r o v e d a n y one o f t h o s e s e v e n e l e m e n t s , t h e n y o u s h a l l a c q u i t the Defendant o f C a p i t a l Murder. "Okay. T h a t ' s "(No v e r b a l "THE (R. clear? response.) COURT: Good." 1650-57.) After instructing on capital murder and i n t e n t i o n a l m u r d e r , t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t went on t o i n s t r u c t t h e jury that " i f [ i t d i d ] not reach C a p i t a l Murder lesser included o r murder, then offense a unanimous [ i t would] of manslaughter, 17 v e r d i c t on consider the next of the provocation CR-09-1349 sort." (R. 1659.) Although the c i r c u i t c o u r t i n s t r u c t e d the j u r y on p r o v o c a t i o n m a n s l a u g h t e r , i t d i d n o t i n s t r u c t t h e that to f i n d Riggs find that the g u i l t y of State proved absence of heat of p a s s i o n . c a p i t a l murder, beyond a jury i t must reasonable first doubt In other words, the c i r c u i t the court d i d n o t i n s t r u c t t h e j u r y t h a t as an e l e m e n t o f c a p i t a l m u r d e r the S t a t e must d i s p r o v e t h a t R i g g s was l a w f u l l y provoked thus caused Payne's d e a t h i n the h e a t of In their " ' [ t ] h e Due briefs Process beyond a reasonable on appeal, Clause both and passion. parties agree r e q u i r e s the p r o s e c u t i o n that to prove doubt the absence of the heat of passion on sudden p r o v o c a t i o n when t h e i s s u e i s p r o p e r l y p r e s e n t e d a homicide c a s e [ , ] ' " Ex (quoting Mullaney however, they regarding the Specifically, of McGriff, Wilbur, strongly State's 412 disagree burden on was 908 U.S. So. 684, whether 2d 704 at 1033 (1975)); an warranted t h e S t a t e a r g u e s t h a t R i g g s was a heat-of-passion evidence v. parte instruction in this case. not e n t i t l e d t o i n s t r u c t i o n b e c a u s e he f a i l e d t o p r e s e n t legal provocation; in t h e r e f o r e , he c o u l d not any have been p r e j u d i c e d by t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t ' s i n c o m p l e t e instruction. (State's other brief, at 36, c o n t e n d s t h a t n o t o n l y was 40.) Riggs, on the he e n t i t l e d t o s u c h an 18 hand, instruction, CR-09-1349 but a l s o by o m i t t i n g the murder i n s t r u c t i o n , critical the c i r c u i t element from i t s c a p i t a l - c o u r t undermined h i s s t r a t e g y "to persuade the j u r y t h a t provoked heat m i t i g a t e d the k i l l i n g to manslaughter." So. 2d a t 1032; "'"[T]he Process Clause passion Ex p a r t e M c G r i f f , see a l s o R i g g s ' s b r i e f , a t 41-42 Due of defense 908 (R. 1481-83.) r e q u i r e s the p r o s e c u t i o n to prove beyond a r e a s o n a b l e doubt a l l of the elements i n c l u d e d in offense the definition charged."'" Ex M c M i l l a n v. of parte McGriff, Pennsylvania, t u r n P a t t e r s o n v. New omitted)). trial the 477 York, Consequently, of which 908 U.S. So. 2d 79, 432 U.S. the 85 197, " ' i t i s the at defendant i s 1035 (1986), 210 (quoting quoting i n (1977), mandatory emphasis duty of j u d g e t o i n s t r u c t t h e j u r y o r a l l y on t h e d i f f e r e n t a and d i s t i n g u i s h i n g e l e m e n t s o f t h e o f f e n s e c h a r g e d and t h a t i n t h e absence of such instructions from the c o u r t , the jury n o t i n t e l l i g e n t l y c o m p l y w i t h t h e i r d u t y as j u r o r s . S t a t e , A l a . C r . App., McGriff, So. 908 2d 467, So. 471 405 So. 2d a t 1035 2d 41, 48 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1984)). M i l l e r v. (1981).'" (quoting Ainsworth v. could Ex parte State, 465 Further, " ' [ i ] t i s a b a s i c t e n e t o f A l a b a m a law t h a t "a p a r t y i s e n t i t l e d t o have his theory presented of to the the case, jury by made by proper 19 the pleadings instruction, and issues, ... and the CR-09-1349 [trial] court's reversible failure error."'" I n c . v. 1993), q u o t i n g give those Int'l. Winner I n c . , 863 So. 2d 1088, 1091 America, to Corp. instructions i s v. Common Sense, ( A l a . 2003) ( q u o t i n g V o l k s w a g e n Marinelli, 628 So. 2d 378, i n t u r n A l a b a m a Farm B u r e a u I n c . v. J e r i c h o P l a n t a t i o n , I n c . , 481 So. 384-85 Mut. of (Ala. Ins. Serv., 2d 343, 344 ( A l a . 1985)). Under t h e l a w i n t h i s State: "A p e r s o n d o e s n o t commit m u r d e r ... [and by e x t e n s i o n c a p i t a l m u r d e r ] i f he was moved t o a c t by a sudden h e a t o f p a s s i o n c a u s e d by a p r o v o c a t i o n r e c o g n i z e d by l a w , and b e f o r e t h e r e had b e e n a reasonable t i m e f o r t h e p a s s i o n t o c o o l and f o r r e a s o n t o r e a s s e r t i t s e l f . The b u r d e n o f i n j e c t i n g t h e i s s u e o f k i l l i n g u n d e r l e g a l p r o v o c a t i o n i s on t h e d e f e n d a n t , b u t t h i s does n o t s h i f t t h e b u r d e n o f proof. This subsection does not apply to a prosecution f o r , or preclude a conviction of, manslaughter or other crime." S e c t i o n 1 3 A - 6 - 2 ( b ) , A l a . Code 1975. So. I n Ex p a r t e M c G r i f f , 2d a t 1033-34, t h e A l a b a m a Supreme C o u r t e x p l a i n e d 908 that once a d e f e n d a n t on t r i a l f o r c a p i t a l m u r d e r has " i n j e c t e d t h e issue of provoked instruct beyond heat the j u r y t h a t a reasonable of p a s s i o n , " "'[t]o doubt the c i r c u i t court c o n v i c t , t h e s t a t e must [that] the defendant was must prove not l a w f u l l y p r o v o k e d t o do t h e a c t w h i c h c a u s e d t h e d e a t h o f t h e deceased by a sudden heat of 20 passion.'" (quoting Alabama CR-09-1349 Pattern Jury Instructions - Criminal, pp. 6-8, emphasis omitted). Further, i t i s w e l l s e t t l e d t h a t "'[a] k i l l i n g i n sudden p a s s i o n e x c i t e d by s u f f i c i e n t p r o v o c a t i o n , w i t h o u t m a l i c e , i s manslaughter.'" R o b e r s o n v . S t a t e , 217 A l a . 696, 699, 117 So. 412, ( q u o t i n g Vaughan v. S t a t e , 201 A l a . 472, 474, 415 (1928) 78 So. 378, 380 ( 1 9 1 8 ) ) . Code 1975, p r o v i d e s S p e c i f i c a l l y , § 13A-6-3(a)(2), A l a . that a person commits the crime of manslaughter i f "[h]e causes the death o f another person under circumstances t h a t would c o n s t i t u t e [intentional m u r d e r ] ; e x c e p t , t h a t he c a u s e s t h e d e a t h due t o a sudden heat of p a s s i o n caused by p r o v o c a t i o n r e c o g n i z e d by law, and b e f o r e a r e a s o n a b l e time f o r the p a s s i o n t o c o o l and f o r r e a s o n t o a s s e r t itself." A l t h o u g h c o u r t s have r e a c h e d d i f f e r e n t c o n c l u s i o n s as t o what c o n s t i t u t e s a d e q u a t e l e g a l p r o v o c a t i o n , i n R o g e r s v. S t a t e , 819 So. 2d 643, 662 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 2 0 0 1 ) , t h i s Court r e c o g n i z e d t h e f o l l o w i n g t h r e e s i t u a t i o n s i n w h i c h m u r d e r may be reduced t o manslaughter on t h e b a s i s that there existed l e g a l p r o v o c a t i o n : " ( 1 ) when t h e a c c u s e d w i t n e s s e s h i s o r h e r spouse i n the act of assaulted or faced with adultery; an i m m i n e n t (2) when the accused i s assault on h i m s e l f ; a n d (3) when t h e a c c u s e d w i t n e s s e s an a s s a u l t on a f a m i l y 21 member CR-09-1349 or c l o s e r e l a t i v e . " See 1298 1986) of ( A l a . C r i m . App. imminent passion"). assault court v. State, be sufficient Thus, once a d e f e n d a n t has the instruct So. 2d 1296, the arouse heat of trial o r more o f t h o s e three is entitled jury that to i n j e c t e d i n t o the r e l a t e d t o one defendant the 500 ( h o l d i n g t h a t " t h e mere a p p e a r a n c e may the i s s u e of p r o v o c a t i o n situations, a l s o Cox to State have bears the the circuit burden d i s p r o v i n g t h a t the d e f e n d a n t a c t e d out of the h e a t of b r o u g h t a b o u t by a d e q u a t e p r o v o c a t i o n . M c G r i f f , 908 of passion So. 2d a t 1033-34. Here, Riggs was charged with the capital offense murder d u r i n g the c o u r s e of a b u r g l a r y , i n v i o l a t i o n of § 5-40(a)(4), Ala. Code 1975, acting i n self-defense of the but at the time of the l e s s e r - i n c l u d e d offense See (R. 1452-53.) and At t r i a l , k i l l e d Payne; i n s t e a d , he heat of p a s s i o n , " c l a i m i n g t h a t he w i t h a d o o r and knife. Payne Ex parte claimed him he either or guilty R i g g s d i d n o t deny t h a t he shot " i n j e c t e d the i s s u e of provoked McGriff, came a f t e r him the 13A- manslaughter. 908 So. 2d s h o t Payne o n l y a f t e r she h i t him at was shooting of p r o v o c a t i o n w i t h what he S p e c i f i c a l l y , Riggs presented met that of back door 22 at 1033, by i n the eye b e l i e v e d t o be a evidence i n d i c a t i n g that to talk. During the CR-09-1349 conversation, Payne became a n g r y a f t e r R i g g s a s k e d a b o u t h e r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h B a t t l e and slammed t h e d o o r i n R i g g s ' s striking Riggs him i n t h e eye further bedroom, stated she p i c k e d and that causing a f t e r he up what him face, t o h i t h i s head. followed he b e l i e v e d Payne t o be a p p e a r e d t o be g e t t i n g r e a d y t o a t t a c k h i m . i n t o her a knife Riggs s t a t e d and that he f e a r e d f o r h i s s a f e t y , and, t h e r e f o r e , r e a c h e d f o r t h e gun he was firing. carrying i n h i s pants and began (R. 1396, 1409.) By t h i s e v i d e n c e , R i g g s a d e q u a t e l y " i n j e c t e d t h e i s s u e o f provoked 1033. heat of passion." McGriff, 908 So. 2d a t See S h u l t z v. S t a t e , 480 So. 2d 73, 76 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1985)("[T]he appellant fact before provocation.") Therefore, the Ex p a r t e that he shot victim was about the v i c t i m could ( c i t i n g Roberson, to that Accordingly, constitute 217 A l a . 696, 117 So. 4 1 2 ) . he charge acted regarding by the State's provoked heat of on p r o v o k e d heat of passion 2d burden to passion. as i t a p p l i e d t o the c a p i t a l murder charge c o n s t i t u t e s p l a i n e r r o r . " So. legal "the f a i l u r e of the [ c i r c u i t ] c o u r t t o charge the jury accurately 908 cut the R i g g s was e n t i t l e d t o a p r o p e r i n s t r u c t i o n d u r i n g capital-murder disprove the at 1036-37. Cf. 23 Shultz, 480 So. McGriff, 2d at 76 CR-09-1349 ("[Section] cover 1 3 A - 6 - 3 ( a ) ( 2 ) [ , A l a . Code 1975,] i s d e s i g n e d those defendant killing situations is guilty was totally court manslaughter the jury does not believe o f m u r d e r b u t a l s o does n o t b e l i e v e justified S t a t e , 445 So. 2d 958 circuit where by self-defense."); ( A l a . C r i m . App. erred in instruction failing 1983) to to a the Wyllie v. ( h o l d i n g t h a t the give a provocation- i n a c a s e where t h e d e f e n d a n t shot h e r h u s b a n d a f t e r he t h r e a t e n e d t o c u t h e r t h r o a t w i t h a k n i f e and then came a t h e r w i t h h i s hands i n h i s p o c k e t ) ; H i l l S t a t e , 485 So. 2d 808 d e f e n d a n t was the fact heat of 1986) e n t i t l e d to a manslaughter that his threatened to k i l l circuit ( A l a . C r i m . App. wife him). attacked passion as him i t applied charge to (holding t h a t the i n s t r u c t i o n b a s e d on with B e c a u s e i t was c o u r t not t o a c c u r a t e l y v. a knife and p l a i n e r r o r f o r the the j u r y Riggs's on provoked capital murder c h a r g e , t h i s C o u r t r e v e r s e s R i g g s ' s c o n v i c t i o n and s e n t e n c e o f d e a t h and remands t h i s cause f o r f u r t h e r p r o c e e d i n g s . II. Although t h i s Court reverses Riggs's c o n v i c t i o n reasons s t a t e d i n P a r t I of t h i s o p i n i o n , address a r i s e on another issue Riggs raises retrial. 24 on f o r the i t i s compelled to a p p e a l b e c a u s e i t may CR-09-1349 Riggs instruct element argues that the jury court f a i l e d to properly r e g a r d i n g the law of b u r g l a r y , a of h i s c a p i t a l contends the c i r c u i t murder charge. critical Specifically, Riggs that the c i r c u i t court erroneously " f a i l e d to inform j u r o r s t h a t i f t h e y d e t e r m i n e d t h a t [he] o c c u p i e d o r p o s s e s s e d the apartment burglary a t the time was committed." the offense was (Riggs's b r i e f , committed, a t 17.) no Riggs n e i t h e r requested nor objected t o the c i r c u i t court's f a i l u r e to i n s t r u c t the j u r y that a person cannot b u r g l a r i z e a p l a c e t h e p e r s o n owns o r o c c u p i e s ; t h e r e f o r e , t h i s i s s u e i s r e v i e w e d for p l a i n error only. R u l e 45A, A l a . R. App. P. R i g g s was c h a r g e d w i t h t h e o f f e n s e o f m u r d e r made c a p i t a l b e c a u s e i t was c o m m i t t e d d u r i n g t h e c o u r s e o f a b u r g l a r y . See § 13A-5-40(a)(4), A l a . Code 1975. At trial, the State p r e s e n t e d evidence i n d i c a t i n g t h a t Riggs had not l i v e d i n the apartment w i t h Payne a n d h e r f a m i l y since the f a l l o f 2007, when Payne e n d e d h e r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h R i g g s a n d r e t u r n e d h i s belongings. contrary. Riggs, Specifically, t h a t he was s t i l l time however, of her death. Payne p u r c h a s e presented he p r e s e n t e d evidence testimony to indicating l i v i n g w i t h Payne i n t h e a p a r t m e n t Riggs further testified f u r n i t u r e f o r the apartment, 25 that the at the he h e l p e d a s s i s t e d with the CR-09-1349 r e n t and o t h e r u t i l i t i e s , apartment, 73, 1308.) he was this the and had h i s own key. (R. 1231-32, 1250-51, 1272¬ R i g g s ' s m o t h e r , a u n t , and son a l s o t e s t i f i e d living o f f e n s e was kept h i s p e r s o n a l b e l o n g i n g s at the with Payne committed. i n the (R. 1231, evidence, Riggs argued apartment apartment at the a legal a t t h e t i m e o f P a y n e ' s d e a t h and, n o t have c o m m i t t e d time 1250-51, 1273.) t h a t he was that the Based on occupant of thus, could the c a p i t a l o f f e n s e of burglary-murder as charged i n the i n d i c t m e n t . At the instructed close of the j u r y a l l the evidence, the circuit court r e g a r d i n g the S t a t e ' s t h e o r y t h a t was l i c e n s e d t o be a t P a y n e s ' s may have b e e n r e v o k e d . 486 ( A l a . 1999). See apartment but t h a t the D a v i s v. S t a t e , Specifically, the c i r c u i t 737 So. Riggs license 2d court stated: "THE COURT: A p e r s o n ' s l i c e n s e o r p r i v i l e g e t o e n t e r o r r e m a i n i n a d w e l l i n g , may be r e v o k e d a t any t i m e by t h e l a w f u l p o s s e s s o r o f t h e p r o p e r t y . If the p e r s o n r e m a i n s a f t e r t h e p r i v i l e g e has been revoked, t h a t person remains u n l a w f u l l y . "Breaking i s not an essential element burglary. O n l y an e n t r y must be p r o v e d . of "The u n l a w f u l remaining prong of Alabama's b u r g l a r y s t a t u t e c o v e r e d c a s e s where a p e r s o n e n t e r s with license or p r i v i l e g e , but remains after t e r m i n a t i o n of such l i c e n s e or p r i v i l e g e . " 26 480, CR-09-1349 (R. 1665.) jury on The circuit Riggs's theory f o u n d t h a t R i g g s was the offense, thus, he t h a t t h e m u r d e r was T h i s C o u r t has of defense, living could c o u l d n o t be c o u r t d i d n o t , however, i n s t r u c t i . e . , that i n the apartment n o t be found g u i l t y i f the jury at the time of b u r g l a r y c o n v i c t e d o f c a p i t a l m u r d e r on t h e committed the of and, basis during a burglary. explained: " I n A l a b a m a , ' [ b ] u r g l a r y , l i k e t r e s p a s s , i s an o f f e n s e a g a i n s t t h e p o s s e s s i o n , and hence t h e t e s t f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f d e t e r m i n i n g i n whom t h e o w n e r s h i p o f t h e p r e m i s e s s h o u l d be l a i d i n an i n d i c t m e n t i s not the t i t l e , but the occupancy or p o s s e s s i o n a t t h e t i m e t h e o f f e n s e was c o m m i t t e d . ' H a m i l t o n v. S t a t e , 283 A l a . 540, 545, 219 So. 2d 369, 374, c e r t . d e n i e d , 396 U.S. 868, 90 S. C t . 134, 24 L. Ed. 2d 121 (1969) ( q u o t i n g F u l l e r v. S t a t e , 28 A l a . App. 28, 30, 177 So. 353, 354 ( 1 9 3 7 ) ) . 'A p e r s o n " e n t e r s o r r e m a i n s u n l a w f u l l y " i n o r upon p r e m i s e s when he i s n o t l i c e n s e d , i n v i t e d o r p r i v i l e g e d t o do s o . ' A l a . Code 1975, § 1 3 A - 7 - 1 ( 4 ) . Under A l a b a m a l a w , a p e r s o n who i s l i c e n s e d or p r i v i l e g e d to enter premises cannot commit criminal trespass or burglary. J o h n s o n v. S t a t e , 473 So. 2d 607, 609 ( A l a . C r . App. 1 9 8 5 ) . " W h i t e v. S t a t e , 587 So. 2d 1218, Therefore, r a t h e r than t i t l e . State, servant) 42 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1990) . " [ c ] h a r g i n g ownership i n a b u r g l a r y count puts the onus on t h e S t a t e o f s h o w i n g o r by 1223 'ownership,' The p e r s o n i n p o s s e s s i o n i s the occupant A l a . App. i . e . , occupancy 249, 254, 27 (either f o r t h i s purpose." 160 So. 2d 496, -¬ himself White 500 v. (1964) CR-09-1349 (internal citations burglary] own i s not committed dwelling App. omitted). Because "the offense [of by one who b r e a k s a n d e n t e r s h i s or other b u i l d i n g , " S t a n l e y v. S t a t e , 83, 84, 326 So. 2d 148, 149 57 A l a . ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1 9 7 6 ) , t h e A l a b a m a Supreme C o u r t h a s h e l d t h a t " [ a ] n e s s e n t i a l averment i n a c h a r g e f o r an o f f e n s e a g a i n s t p r o p e r t y i s t h e n e g a t i o n o f the defendant's ownership possessory affirmatively show against which the crime i s l a i d , State, At t r i a l , so the property, general or i s i n another." to special, W i l s o n v. (1945) (citing R i g g s p r e s e n t e d e v i d e n c e t h a t he was l i v i n g i n a p a r t m e n t w i t h Payne a t t h e t i m e o f t h e m u r d e r . the jury as 87 A l a . 12, 6 So. 54 ( 1 8 8 9 ) ) . t h i s e v i d e n c e , R i g g s was e n t i t l e d t o a j u r y if right, 247 A l a . 84, 85, 22 So. 2d 601, 602 Emmonds v. S t a t e , the that or B a s e d on instruction that f o u n d t h a t R i g g s was l i v i n g i n t h e a p a r t m e n t with Payne a t t h e t i m e o f t h e m u r d e r , i t c o u l d n o t f i n d t h a t he h a d committed capital a b u r g l a r y and, t h u s , c o u l d n o t f i n d him g u i l t y o f murder. conviction and d e c i d e whether failure Because sentence plain this Court of death on i s reversing Issue Riggs's I , i t need n o t e r r o r r e s u l t e d from t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t ' s to give t h i s unrequested 28 instruction. CR-09-1349 Accordingly, opinion, f o r the Riggs's r e v e r s e d , and t h i s consistent with REVERSED AND reasons conviction cause this and stated i n Part sentence of i s remanded f o r f u r t h e r I of this death are proceedings opinion. REMANDED. Welch, Kellum, Burke, and J o i n e r , J J . , c o n c u r . 29

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.