On 4 July, , year-old Stacey crept downstairs as her inebriated father was passed out on the couch. She raised a rifle and shot him once in the shoulder and then once in the head. Stacey confessed to the murder and explained the prolonged abuse of herself and her younger sister was the catalyst. However, following her arrest, Capt. Dan Chapman declined to comment on her account and instead, said that police believed Stacey had murdered her father for monetary gain.
During the investigation, prosecutors announced that Stacey had paid one or two hitmen to kill her father. One man was identified as Ronald Barnett and according to prosecutors, Stacey had given Ronald a. He was arrested and charged with tampering with physical evidence. According to authorities, Christy was working alongside Stacey when she attempted to hire Ronald to kill their father.
According to St. We will choose the most meaningful blogs written by you for display on the front page. I believe that every child, woman and man who suffers from sexual abuse becomes a sister because we share a common bond, one of betrayal and suffering.
We need one another in order to thrive, and maybe even to survive. I hope in my lifetime we can eradicate, wipe out, and destroy sexual abuse. That surely cannot to be too lofty of a goal, can it? If we communicate, we create. We need to create a safe world for all children. Thank you for taking the time to log on, and I hope you become a member.
She is currently free--emotionally and physically--from her difficult past. Lannert founded a resource website and non-profit organization, Healing Sisters, to aid women who have suffered abuse. On January 10, , outgoing Missouri Governor Matt Blunt commuted Lannert's sentence and that of another woman convicted under similar circumstances. He said, "After an exhaustive review of the facts in both cases, I am commuting the sentences of Stacey Lannert and Charity Carey, who suffered extensive abuse before they took action against the men who raped them and subjected them to other horrible physical and emotional abuse.
Lannert, after exhausting all of her appeals, sought from Missouri Governor Matt Blunt either commutation of her sentence to life in prison with the possibility of parole after 15 years she had already served 18 years or pardon. She had gained support for clemency. On January 10, , the outgoing governor announced the commutation, after completing an "exhaustive review of the evidence," in which he determined that Lannert had suffered extensive abuse by her father, Thomas Lannert.
In view of time served, Stacey Lannert was soon released from prison. McCulloch has said he does not believe her claims of abuse.
Stacey Lannert has since founded Healing Sisters, a resource website and non-profit organization to aid women who have suffered abuse, as well as to work to end sexual abuse in the United States. On March 11, , the court ruled in favor of the original trial judge, though "reluctantly. The judge refused to include any claim of self-defense in his instructions to the jury.
The jury found her guilty in and sentenced her to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, as required by the law. She testified that on July 4, , she and her sister got home late, entering the house via a basement window at approximately am.
Seeing a rifle, she decided to kill her father. The jury found Lannert guilty of murder in the first degree and armed criminal action. She was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of probation or parole on the murder count. Lannert then appealed her conviction and sentence, as well as the denial of her motion for post-conviction relief. On appeal, Lannert claimed, inter alia, that the trial court erred in 1 overruling her motion to present battered spouse syndrome evidence on the issue of self-defense, and 2 refusing to instruct the jury on self-defense.
Lannert, S. After again citing this lack of evidence, the court also rejected Lannert's second claim. After exhausting her opportunities for relief in the state courts, Lannert filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.
The district court denied the motion in its entirety, but issued a certificate of appealability on Lannert's claim that the trial court violated her Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process and a fair trial by excluding evidence of battered spouse syndrome and in refusing to instruct the jury on self-defense.
Bowersox, F. We first address the State's procedural default argument. See Ivy v. Caspari, F. Delo, F. Caspari, 36 F. Although the question may be close, we agree with the district court that the Missouri appellate court in fact ruled on the merits of Lannert's evidence-related claim.
Oklahoma, U. Hicks, U. Gammon, 79 F. McGuire, U. Lannert's Hicks argument is similar to that which we rejected in Chambers v. According to Lannert, her battered spouse syndrome evidence was excluded in violation of the Missouri statute, she had a right to expect that the statute would be properly applied, and, since that did not occur, she has been deprived of due process of law.
Chambers, F. This case simply does not fall within the narrow rule, and, as in Chambers, we reject the attempt to constitutionalize an alleged violation of state law.
Furthermore, even if Lannert's claim were reviewable under Hicks, we are not persuaded that the trial court's evidentiary ruling was erroneous under Missouri law. State v. Anderson, S. Chambers, S. The court outlined the elements of the defense as follows:. Deadly force may be used in self-defense only when there is 1 an absence of aggression or provocation on the part of the defender, 2 a real or apparently real necessity for the defender to kill in order to save himself from an immediate danger of serious bodily injury or death, 3 a reasonable cause for the defender's belief in such necessity, and 4 an attempt by the defender to do all within his power consistent with his personal safety to avoid the danger and the need to take a life.
Edwards, 60 S. Although there was testimony that Lannert's father generally molested her after he had been drinking, there was no indication that he had abused her or had otherwise threatened her on the night of the murder. See Anderson, S. Riley, S. We in no way minimize the physical and psychological trauma that Lannert suffered as a result of her father's abuse. However, as did the petitioner in Anderson v.
This we cannot do. See Bounds v. See, e. Janes, Wash. That is a decision for the Missouri Legislature and the Missouri courts to make, however, and not, as we point out below, a requirement of federal constitutional law. Accordingly, we reject Lannert's contention that the state trial court erred in concluding that the expert's testimony regarding battered spouse syndrome was inadmissible under section Kentucky, U.
Trombetta, U. Texas, U. The right to introduce favorable evidence, however, is not without limit. See Taylor v. Illinois, U. Egelhoff, U. New York, U. Lannert has failed to sustain this burden. She submits no argument or authority relating to the due process inquiry. Instead, she relies on case law recognizing her right to present favorable evidence to the jury, while ignoring the limitations on this right.
Iowa, F. Lannert next contends that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on self-defense. We agree, for the purposes of this appeal, that a defendant has a due process right to a self-defense instruction if the evidence satisfies the requirements of the applicable law on self-defense. See Woods v. Solem, F. Withrow, F. Roth, 37 F. But see Crump v. Means v. We must also find that the error in refusing to instruct the jury in this case was of a constitutional magnitude.
For the reasons discussed above, however, we are satisfied that Lannert was not entitled to a self-defense instruction under Missouri law.
Nunn, S. To the extent that Lannert challenges Missouri's formulation or interpretation of its self-defense rule, we are not persuaded. See Anderson, 44 F. California, U. Accordingly, we conclude that Lannert's failure-to-instruct claim does not entitle her to habeas relief.
I concur in the majority's opinion because I agree that we are bound by Missouri's interpretation of its battered spouse syndrome statute. It appears to me, however, that the statute does not require the narrow construction given to it by the Missouri Court of Appeals. The state court concluded Lannert was the initial aggressor in the tragic series of events that terminated with her father's death. The Missouri courts have determined that in such a circumstance, a defendant is not entitled to a self-defense instruction, and consequently is not permitted to present evidence of battered women's syndrome to buttress her claim of self-defense.
In light of the years of sexual abuse that Lannert and her sister endured in their father's home, I believe it is reasonable to conclude that Lannert's father was the true initial aggressor. At the very least, one could conclude that Lannert's altered state of mind led her to believe that her father, a relentless attacker, would hurt her or her sister again, perhaps on the night of his death.
The majority appropriately notes that if Missouri's battered spouse syndrome statute is to have any meaning at all, it must serve as a modification of the mental state required of the battered woman. Williams, S. In State v. Pisciotta, S.
In other words, a battered woman must present a viable self-defense theory before she is permitted to reveal how years of abuse led her to act in a socially unacceptable, but perhaps morally justifiable, manner. This interpretation unjustly inhibits the intended effect of the battered spouse syndrome statute because it demands that a battered woman's actions conform to the old doctrine of self-defense.
Because the Missouri courts have the authority to interpret the state's battered spouse syndrome statute, however, I reluctantly concur. The Honorable Catherine D. The Missouri Court of Appeals has recognized that the application of this statute is not dependent upon the marital status of the defendant, State v.
However, because Lannert's battered spouse syndrome claim is interrelated with her self-defense claim, we will address her arguments regarding the evidentiary ruling. See infra Part III. Lannert, however, does not suggest that the district court erred in relying on an element that was not specifically cited by the trial court. Instead, Lannert argues that the evidence was sufficient to support a finding that Lannert's father was, indeed, the initial aggressor.
Also consolidated within this appeal, Defendant appeals the denial of her Rule We remand for a gender-Batson hearing and affirm with regard to all other issues. Defendant does not challenge the sufficiency of evidence on appeal. In her subsequent confession to police, Defendant stated, "I decided at that moment that I was going to do it, I was going to kill him.
Defendant went downstairs to look for a phone but thought to herself, "He didn't deserve to live. Then they staged a scene in which Fortune said loudly so neighbors could hear, "Stacey, call the police.
Defendant, her sister and Fortune were subsequently taken to the police station for questioning.
0コメント