Hammond v. State

The trial court was authorized to pose general voir dire questions to prospective jurors en masse, rather than while they were seated in the jury box in panels of twelve.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Appellant Eugene Hammond was convicted of aggravated assault and making terroristic threats in connection with a domestic disturbance between him and his wife, Cynthia Carstarphen Hammond, and felony murder aggravated assault in connection with the death of the couple’s 16-year-old son, Carl Carstarphen.1 On appeal, appellant takes issue with the sufficiency of the evidence presented against him, several trial court rulings during voir dire, the denial of appellant’s motion to sever offenses, and the trial court’s determination that appellant’s post-arrest statement to the investigating detective was freely and voluntarily given. After reviewing the record and transcript of appellant’s prosecution, we affirm.

The State presented evidence that appellant fired a Ruger 9mm pistol at his son in the family home, and that Carl Carstarphen died as a result of a gunshot wound to the abdomen, the bullet entering the abdomen and exiting the victim’s back. The victim’s teen-aged sister testified that appellant and his wife had been arguing the evening her brother was shot, and that she had seen appellant with a knife and had heard him threaten his wife with decapitation. The sister further testified that, fearing her father would harm her mother, she had snuck upstairs while her parents argued, retrieved a .38 caliber pistol from her mother’s purse, and returned downstairs to her brother’s room. There, Carl took the gun from the place his sister put it, told her to call for emergency help, and went upstairs. Shortly thereafter, Carl, bleeding from his fatal wound, stumbled down the stairs. Appellant, while preparing to drive Carl to the hospital, stated he had shot the victim.

Hammond v. State

The trial court was authorized to pose general voir dire questions to prospective jurors en masse, rather than while they were seated in the jury box in panels of twelve.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report