Murphy v. State

Evidence of the victim's prior acts of violence against third persons was properly excluded, since the record did not show that the defendant complied with the notice requirements of Uniform Superior Court Rule 31.6 A.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Appellant Leon Dwayne Murphy appeals his convictions for murder and illegal firearm possession,1 claiming that evidentiary errors and ineffective assistance from counsel require that his convictions be reversed. Having reviewed the record and found appellant’s claims to be without merit, we affirm. The evidence of record shows that after arguing with the victim, appellant pulled out his .38 caliber handgun and shot the victim five times. Appellant then took the victim’s .380 caliber handgun from him and shot him an additional three times before fleeing. At trial, appellant admitted that he committed the shooting, but claimed it was in self-defense because during the argument, the victim reached for his handgun in an effort to shoot appellant.

1. The evidence of record was sufficient for rational triers of fact to find appellant guilty of the crimes for which he was convicted.2 As noted, appellant admitted to having shot the victim, but claimed to have done so in self-defense.3 It was for the jury to decide whether to accept or reject that claim.4 The evidence of record showed: 1 that the victim suffered eight bullet wounds, including four to his back, fired from two different guns; 2 that the victim was sprawled on the floor while being shot with his own gun, which he never had a chance to raise; 3 that appellant fired shots into the victim from various angles; 4 that, even though he had completely immobilized the victim, appellant fled the scene without attempting to obtain medical assistance; and 5 that appellant eluded the police until the following day, when he was arrested. Moreover, appellant made several conflicting statements, including differing accounts about how he obtained the victim’s gun and whether the victim’s gun fired accidentally or whether appellant fired it intentionally. This evidence was sufficient for rational triers of fact to reject appellant’s claim of self-defense,5 and to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the crimes for which he was convicted.

Murphy v. State

Evidence of the victim's prior acts of violence against third persons was properly excluded, since the record did not show that the defendant complied with the notice requirements of Uniform Superior Court Rule 31.6 A.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report