0
0
Twenty-year-old Wendell Washington (“the victim”) arrived home between 10:30 and 10:45 p.m. on the night of May 5, 2013. He shared the home with his girlfriend, Harley Stokes, and his mother, Diana Washington, both of whom were inside the house when he arrived.
He was a roofer by trade but also sold marijuana and “pills.”
According to Ms. Stokes, the victim did not bring anyone to the house other than family members. Under the circumstances, Ms. Stokes decided to awaken Ms. Washington, who was asleep in a bedroom, and told her “something’s going on outside.” They returned to the front door, at which time they heard “some commotion” outside. One or two gunshots rang out, followed by “a bunch” of other gunshots. After the shooting stopped, Ms. Stokes and Ms. Washington went outside and found the victim alive but mortally wounded on the front porch. At no time did Ms. Stokes or Ms. Washington see who was outside with the victim. Neither woman knew who was shooting or even how many people were outside.
There were multiple 911 calls after the gunshots. In one of the calls, a neighbor reported seeing a white SUV driving past after the gunshots. Another neighborhood resident who lived not far from the victim’s house later reported seeing a white or light silver Mitsubishi SUV drive erratically through a stop sign shortly after the gunshots. The first of the 911 calls occurred at 10:56 p.m.
At 11:03 p.m., approximately seven minutes after the first 911 call, security camera video recorded a light-colored SUV – similar in appearance to the Mitsubishi vehicle described by the neighborhood resident – arriving at the Erlanger Hospital emergency room. Two individuals exited the vehicle and carried a third – Jeremy Reynolds (“the Defendant”) – into the hospital.
They dropped off the Defendant, returned to the vehicle, and promptly left the premises. One of the individuals who dropped off the Defendant was later identified as Deaunte Duncan, but the other was never identified. When Chattanooga police later drove a logical route from the victim’s house to the hospital, obeying all traffic laws, the trip took ten minutes and thirty-seven seconds.
The Defendant had been shot and required emergency treatment. There were two bullet holes in the front left side of the Defendant’s shirt. One was consistent with a contact firearm discharge, and the other exhibited characteristics of a muzzle-to-target distance between three and twenty-four inches. There were also two bullet holes in the right pocket of the victim’s jacket. Both holes exhibited characteristics consistent with a contact firearm discharge, indicating that a gun was fired from inside the jacket pocket.
Unlike the Defendant, the victim did not survive his wounds. The victim was shot a total of seven times: once in the left side of the chest, four times in the back of the left arm, and twice in the back. The two wounds in the back were fatal, as they impacted vital organs, including extensive damage to the heart.
The trial court conducted a lengthy pretrial hearing on the admissibility of evidence of gang membership a week before trial.
The State clarified that it did not intend to introduce proof of bad or violent acts of the Defendant, Duncan, or Jackson.
Rather, the State simply sought to introduce evidence that the Defendant, Duncan, and Jackson were all members of the Gangster Disciples. The State asserted that evidence of shared gang membership was relevant in that it would help to explain why the Defendant and Duncan would be together at the hospital immediately after the victim was killed and why the Hi-Point handgun forensically linked to the scene of the crime would later be recovered from Jackson’s car even though Jackson could not have been at the scene on the night of the shooting. In response, the Defendant sought at the outset of the pretrial hearing to “exclude any mention of gangs.”
The State offered the testimony of a single witness, Investigator Curtis Penney of the Chattanooga Police Department. Penney was familiar with gang members and gang activity in the city in general, but he was most familiar with two specific gangs, one of which was the Gangster Disciples. Investigator Penney testified that there was a nationally standardized process for validating whether an individual qualified as a gang member. The Chattanooga Police Department maintained gang validation forms for this purpose. The gang validation process and form assigned different numbers of points for various activities associated with gang involvement, divided into fifteen categories. Individuals would need a certain total number of points to be considered a validated gang member.
Investigator Penney testified that the Defendant was a validated member of the Gangster Disciples. He went on to explain how the Defendant qualified as a validated gang member. Working off the gang validation form for the Defendant, which was introduced as an exhibit at the hearing, Penney explained that the Defendant received points in four of the fifteen categories:
- Gang tattoo/brands
- Use/possession of symbols, logos, colors, etc.
- Known contact with confirmed gang members
- Participating in photo with confirmed gang members.
The State introduced as exhibits three photographs to help demonstrate how the Defendant qualified for points in the four categories.
One photograph – which appeared to have been posted by the Defendant on Facebook – showed a close-up of the Defendant’s face and upper body, with a tattoo on his right arm visible. Investigator Penney explained that the tattoo was a six-point star and that it contained the letters “G” and “D,” referring to Gangster Disciples. Penney further explained that the six-point star, or Star of David, was itself a Gangster Disciples symbol and paid homage to a co-founder of the Gangster Disciples by the name of David Barksdale, who became known as King David after he passed away. Lastly, Penney explained that the Facebook post itself appeared to originate from the moniker “Alleyez ON Sleepy.” Penney testified that the Defendant is known within the Gangster Disciples as “Sleepy” or “Sleepy G.” This photograph demonstrated how the Defendant qualified for points under the “gang tattoo/brands” category.
Folk Nation is essentially where Gangster Disciples come from. Gangster Disciples itself was actually two different gangs that came together in Chicago and formed as one. The Gangster Disciple Nation fell under Folk Nation.
In the prison system or in a gang system, essentially you fall under two, you’re either in the Folk Nation or you fall under the People Nation.
In this case, Gangster Disciples, they fall in Folk Nation.
The trial court agreed with the Defendant that there was a danger of unfair prejudice associated with evidence of gang membership in that jurors might assume that gang members are dangerous or commit violent acts. However, the trial court concluded that the danger of unfair prejudice did not outweigh the probative value of the evidence. To that point, the trial court noted that the danger of unfair prejudice could be mitigated through a limiting jury instruction.
The Defendant questions the relevance of evidence of gang membership by pointing out that there was no proof that the shooting of the victim was a gang crime.
In contrast to the ruling with respect to evidence of gang membership, the Court of Criminal Appeals concluded that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting background information about the Gangster Disciples and the origins of various gang signs.
We hold that the evidence was legally sufficient to support the Defendant’s conviction for premeditated first-degree murder. We further hold that there was no reversible error with respect to the trial court’s admission of gang-related evidence or any other evidentiary issue properly raised by the Defendant. Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals and reinstate the Defendant’s conviction for premeditated first-degree murder.
State of Tennessee v. Jeremy Reynolds. The Supreme Court of Tennessee. Appeal by Permission from the Court of Criminal Appeals Criminal Court for Hamilton County No. 290147 Barry A. Steelman, Judge. March 31, 2021
Average Rating