at 2608. [W]hy do you consider mitigation, that's because the courts allow you to individualize the justice. Appellant, Peter Anthony Cantu, was charged by indictment with the offense of capital murder for killing Jennifer Ertman in the course of committing or attempting to commit robbery, kidnapping and aggravated sexual assault. Zimmerman v. State, 881 S.W.2d 360 (Tex.Crim.App. However, evidence as to her good character, activities she enjoyed and the impact of her on her family is not relevant as appellant was not on trial for her murder and such evidence serves no purpose other than to inflame the jury.
[THE STATE:] They were all saying that? When the rapes finally ended, the horror was not over. Christina subsequently convinced her husband to report the incident to the police. 1339, 127 L.Ed.2d 687 (1994), Nelson v. State, 864 S.W.2d 496, 498 (Tex.Crim.App.1993), cert. The same objection was lodged with regard to the testimony of Joe Cantu. The 14-year-old, Venancio Medellin, was handled in juvenile court and given the maximum sentence, split between juvenile and adult prison facilities. ), cert. Shoelaces were used to strangle Pena. B B King; B L A C K I E; B Movie Blues; B Rezell and OFTB; B-52s; B-Wave Heusden; B3 Fusion; B3 Kings; B52s; Ba Cissoko; Baaba Maal; Bab L Bluz; Bab Lbluz; Baba Commandant; Baba N Article continues below advertisement. In light of the district court's thorough analysis, we cannot say that reasonable jurists would disagree with that determination and, therefore, deny a COA on this issue.
Pena, however is not the victim for whose death appellant has been indicted and tried, and Payne does not contemplate admission of such evidence as permissible under the Eighth Amendment. THE COURT: Overruled. Maybe some satisfaction, but never closure.". 2954, 57 L.Ed.2d 973 (1978). The court, the attorney representing the state, the defendant, or the defendant's counsel may not inform a juror or a prospective juror of the effect of a failure of a jury to agree on issues submitted under Subsection (c) or (e) of this article. Jester Park at White Oak Bayou. See Peltier v. State, 626 S.W.2d 30 (Tex.Crim.App.1981); Ex parte Sewell, 742 S.W.2d 393 (Tex.Crim.App.1987); Essary v. State, 53 Tex.Crim. On June 24, 1993, Cantu and other members of the Black and White gang met to initiate a new member. However, the protesters in attendance did little more than annoy the families.
United States v. Branch, 91 F.3d 699, 713 (5th Cir.1996) (in discussing the amount of evidence that is sufficient to require an instruction on self defense, the court considered Beck and other cases addressing lesser-included-offense instructions and stated that it is not enough that an item of evidence viewed alone and unweighed against all the evidence supports the instruction sought by the defendant). Further, the overwhelming balance of evidence adduced at trial corroborated Cantu's second statement: (1) Roman Sandoval, a fellow gang member, stated that Cantu called him and confessed to the murders; (2) additional gang members stated that they were following whatever Peter Cantu was doing; (3) Venancia Medellin, a gang member, testified that after he raped Ms. Ertman, Cantu whispered in his ear that [w]e're going to have to kill them, and that Cantu then directed the gang to bring the girls into the woods; and (4) while some of the gang members, including Cantu, recounted the events of that evening to Cantu's older brother Joe and his wife Christina, one gang member described how Cantu kicked one of the girls in the face with his steel toe[ ] [boots] while Cantu commented that [t]he bitch wouldn't die so I stomped on her neck and that the girls had to die [so] they couldn't identify them.. Why kill when we know that sometimes we don't get it right?" If there is the mitigation, is it sufficient, sufficient to rise to the level that you want to take this man, [appellant], and show him some mercy. 2382, 65 L.Ed.2d 392 (1980). We know that Pete Cantu had been residing in El Cerrito, Contra Costa County, California 94530. Article 36.01, which governs the order of proceeding in trial, states in pertinent part:
FN2. See Seale v. State, 158 Tex.Crim. However, we reaffirmed the original holding on appeal. Subsequent decisions by this court have consistently held that a state trial court may not, under Beck, refuse a lesser-included-offense instruction if the jury could rationally acquit on the capital crime and convict for the noncapital crime. East v. Scott, 55 F.3d 996, 1005 (5th Cir.1995) (internal citation omitted) (quoting Cordova v. Lynaugh, 838 F.2d 764, 767 (5th Cir.1988)); see also Aguilar v. Dretke, 428 F.3d 526, 531 (5th Cir.2005). Sometimes people don't make the best decisions, but the following incidents show some truly questionable behavior. Jenny was strangled with the belt of Sean O'Brien, with two murderers pulling, one on each side, until the belt broke. The danger of unfair prejudice to a defendant inherent in the introduction of victim impact evidence with respect to a victim not named in the indictment on which he is being tried is unacceptably high. Point of error forty-one is overruled. Smith v. State, 898 S.W.2d 838 (Tex.Crim.App.) 42.18, 8(b)(2), V.A.C.C.P., provision requiring a prisoner serving a life sentence for capital murder to serve 35 calendar years, without consideration of good conduct time, before becoming eligible for parole. 284, 126 L.Ed.2d 234 (1993). Pete Cantu. 7. psychiatric evidence; and
440, 256 S.W.2d 86, 88 (1953); Tutor v. State, 599 S.W.2d 818, 819 (Tex.Crim.App.1980). Tex.R.App. The phone transferred the photos to her online account, and she shared them on Facebook. 2630, 2639, 129 L.Ed.2d 750 (1994); Anderson v. State, supra at 508-09). FN1. After they finished laughing and stuff, and I said-I don't remember who said it but one of them asked, I think it was my husband, I'm not sure, said, well, what happened to them, and they said, we had to kill them. 2/3/94 -- A jury found Cantu guilty of capital murder. A 14-year-old attacker was given a 40-year sentence. 2.
There is no reason to treat such evidence differently than other relevant evidence is treated. We have already decided these issues against appellant. Dr. Robert Cantu, chief of neurosurgery at Emerson Hospital in Concord, Mass., and one of the nation's foremost authorities on concussions and brain trauma in youth sports, called the decision to . Feb.4, 2009). Three of the animals who did this are gone, but you know it doesn't really make you feel any better," Pena said. The Court opined that victim impact evidence is designed to show the victim's uniqueness as a human being and the state has legitimate interest in counteracting the mitigating evidence which the defendant is entitled to put in, by reminding the sentencer that just as the murderer should be considered as an individual, so too the victim is an individual whose death represents a unique loss to society and in particular to his family. Payne, 501 U.S. at 825, 111 S.Ct.
He and other gang members also stood on the girls' necks to ensure they died. Points one and two claim constitutional error in the trial court denying his requested punishment jury charge instruction informing the jury that pursuant to Article 42.18, 8(b)(2), V.A.C.C.P., a prisoner serving a life sentence for capital murder is not parole eligible until the actual calendar time served, without consideration of good conduct time, equals 35 calendar years. The district court concluded that the state court's rejection of this argument was not an unreasonable application of federal law, and we conclude that reasonable jurists would not disagree with that determination. To this day, Houstonians remember the girls' names and what happened to them. Frustrated that he was unable to have his turn fighting Villareal, he told the gang members that he wanted to beat the man up. [THE STATE:] So, at some point did they move on from talking about what they did to them sexually and tell you that they killed them? Owner at Last Note Productions. Failure To Raise A Due Process Objection To Photographs, Cantu's first claim centers on his trial counsel's failure to raise a due process objection to the admissibility of victim and crime-scene photographs that depicted the gruesome results of Cantu's and his cohorts' conduct. 2/4/10 -- Cantu filed a petition for certiorari review in the U.S. Supreme Court. Raul Omar Villareal and Efrain Perez were sentenced to death, but following the U.S. Supreme Court's 2005 ruling that executing criminals who were not yet 18 at the time of their crimes is unconstitutional, their sentences were commuted to life. Jester, both busy streets. 801(e)(2)(B), as appellant, by his actions and responses, readily agreed with them. Ertman rejected an invitation from Cantu's lawyer to come to his office and read a letter of apology from Cantu. Today you all came out on TV again and it said that their parents are trying to do everything they can to give you all the death penalty, even Yuni, but I don't think so because that's when we go out and take our asses on strike. Pete Cantu (1914 - 1980) - El Cerrito, California. shall consider mitigating evidence to be evidence that a juror might regard as reducing the defendant's moral blameworthiness. 563, 126 L.Ed.2d 463 (1993); Boyd v. State, 811 S.W.2d 105 (Tex.Crim.App.1991). "Im sure a lot of people will get closure from this because it affected a lot of people," said Pena, acknowledging the support his family and the Ertmans have received over the years. See, e.g., Thacker v. Dretke, 396 F.3d 607, 617 (5th Cir.2005); Elizalde v. Dretke, 362 F.3d 323, 332-33 (5th Cir.2004); Woods v. Cockrell, 307 F.3d 353, 361 (5th Cir.2002). on Pedro Cantu III, 30, had been driving a BMW near Jenny and Villa Drives around 10:30 a.m. when police attempted to pull him over, according to the Sheriff's Office. As in guilt/innocence, the State is required to prove each element of the punishment issues beyond a reasonable doubt. Four days after the murders, Christina Cantu convinced her husband to call the police. However, before she ventured into actual statements that appellant and/or his co-defendants made, the following occurred: [THE STATE:] Did someone else tell you what happened? Nevertheless, such error is subject to a harm analysis.
Appellant has given us no reason to revisit our analyses in these cases, nor has he shown us any distinguishing evidence in the record or provided us with any other reason why these cases should not control in the instant case. In appellant's arraignment in open court, but outside the presence of the jury, the State read the indictment and appellant's counsel entered appellant's plea of not guilty. While the plain language of Article 36.01 indicates that an identical procedure should be followed in the jury's presence, it is not required by that language. Elliott v. State, 858 S.W.2d 478 (Tex.Crim.App. To violate due process, an evidentiary ruling must result in a denial of fundamental fairness, and improperly admitting evidence will only justify habeas relief if the admission was a crucial, highly significant factor in the defendant's conviction. Neal v. Cain, 141 F.3d 207, 214 (5th Cir.1998).FN3. He told the call taker that the missing girls' bodies could be found near T.C. Article 37.071 2(h). He told Venancio to stay behind, saying he was "too little to watch." Hence, a plurality of the court concluded that testimony by the sister of the victim concerning the victim's good nature, hobbies, and work ethic was not relevant to sentencing and, therefore, should not have been admitted. Id. Given the sparsity of the victim impact evidence, the fact that it was not mentioned by the State during arguments (appellant did briefly refer to this testimony during his punishment arguments), and the overwhelming focus during the punishment phase on appellant's behavior and the circumstances of the offense, we conclude the victim impact evidence made no contribution to punishment. The trials of Efrain Perez, Raul Villarreal and Jose Medellin were held simultaneously, with common witnesses shuttling from one courtroom to the other. Thus, we turn to an analysis of whether the second prong of the test is met for any of the requested lesser included offenses. ** residential re-roof- w/ no change to pitch/ removing existing shingles and replacing w/ same type/no other work being done/all work must comply w/irc & udc.-**ama, Fee: Date of Offense: 06/24/93
600, 121 L.Ed.2d 537 (1992). denied, 506 U.S. 999, 113 S.Ct. Each juror may or may not believe certain evidence is mitigating; however, the constitution only requires that where a juror believes there is relevant mitigating evidence, that juror must have a vehicle to give his or her reasoned moral response to such evidence.
In Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68, 105 S.Ct. Id. In support of his argument, appellant explains that prior to trial, he filed a Motion to Provide Funds for Expert Assistance-Jury Study. By his motion, appellant proposed that the trial court should provide him funds with which he could hire a scholar who would study a sample of jurors and their understanding of the special punishment issues.