[ad_1]
Joseph Acosta Crisostomo
The Supreme Court of the CNMI upheld the convictions of the notorious habitual offender Joseph Acosta Crisostomo, who was sentenced to life imprisonment for kidnapping, rape and the murder of bartender Emerita R. Romero.
In a 39-page notice released on Friday, high court judges said that even after omitting errors in the decisions of Superior Court Judge Joseph Camacho, much evidence remains
. Crisostomo's belief, and are unable to say, even taken together, that it is more likely that not the mistakes materially affected the verdict. We refuse to overturn for cumulative error, "said the Supreme Court's opinion written by Associate Justice John A. Manglona and approved by Chief Justice Alexandro C. Castro and Associate Judge Perry B. Inos. [19659003] Crisostomo, through the intermediary of Janet H. King, appealed her convictions on the basis of numerous irregularities before and during the trial.
The defendant submitted 10 questions: the denial of testimony of Expert, admission of expert testimony, refusal of his motion to transfer the place, failure to reiterate the instructions of the jury at the end of the proof admission of evidence of improper character; Testimony based on inadmissible suggestive identification, admission of fingerprint evidence, use of Skype testimonials, admission of evidence regarding the refusal to submit to a polygraph examination, and cumulative errors in
Deputy Attorney General Matthew C. Baisley pleaded for the government before the CNMI Supreme Court. The then chief public prosecutor, Brian Flaherty, and the then Deputy Attorney General, Margo Brown-Badawy, represented the government at trial.
On the rejection of the expert opinion, the judges ruled that the deputy judge Joseph N. Camacho be the lawyer to question the genetic expert of Crisostomo, Mr. David Haymer , on its methodology and reliability, and the judge also did not investigate these matters on his own, without establishing a sufficiently elaborate record for control of the high court.
The judges stated that Mr. Camacho improperly limited the evidence regarding the reliability and application of Haymer's method and, as a result, prematurely made his conclusion on Mr. Haymer's admissibility.
The Judges stated that because of this error,
"The manner in which the court rendered its decisions was manifestly erroneous, based on an erroneous view of the law," said the judges, however, held that even if Camacho had erred in determining the admissibility of Haymer's testimony, a thorough examination led the High Court to conclude that the exclusion was harmless
. Crisostomo said he did not seek to present Haymer to testify on any evidence, rather, his testimony was sought to point out potential flaws in the interpretation of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's DNA mix. DNA analyst Susana Kehl
Haymer made the trial of Crisostomo imperfect, it was no less accurate.
"We find a just assurance of innocence that the error did not materially affect the verdict: if Haymer had been able to testify, it is more likely that no. Were returned," he said. said the judges, concluding that they find harmless harm.
On the testimony of the expert in barefoot morphology William Bodziak, the judges said that they found it obvious – and certainly more likely than unlikely – that Camacho would have nonetheless admitted Bodziak as a & dquo; After an appropriate reliability determination.
"As such, we find the inability to make findings as to the reliability of
. With respect to the issue of change of venue, the judges found Crisostomo's vague claim insufficient.
The Judges stated that the discussion of the knowledge of the case by some jurors was insufficient, the Constitution requires that the trier of fact be impartial and not ignorant.
"We therefore rely on the province of the trial judge and find no abuse of discretion, "said the judges, said that because the judge has wide discretion to decide to issue an instruction rather than declare a cancellation and that they (judges) assume that the curative instruction of the judge was followed in order to overcome any prejudicial effect of the statement of a witness, they find no error.The judges stated that, despite the suggestive installation of police officers, Joanne Castro, the former 17-year-old partner of Crisostomo, was able to provide reliable identification, which made the identification of Crisostomo's voice. identification of the eligible court.
"We do not find any violation of due process," the judges said.
On the fingerprint evidence, the judges concluded that taking Crisostomo's fingerprints was not a critical step in the proceedings and that subsequent admission of Crisostomo's fingerprints did not violate not the right of the Sixth Amendment to the assistance of a lawyer
to Camacho admit proof of imprint.
On Skype's testimony, the judges stated that Camacho did not err in allowing David Snyder to testify via Skype, they found no obvious error.
Snyder is the hearing care professional who has improved Romero's 911 call.
With respect to the polygraph testimony, the Judges stated that any error in the admission of testimony regarding Crisostomo's refusal to submit to a polygraph was unclear in light of record as a whole
"The judges said that they evaluated the cumulative detrimental effect of trial errors compared to the sum of the evidence presented against Crisostomo
The judges noted the errors of Camacho in four questions, especially the refusal
The judges however stated that the government's evidence that Crisostomo was the author of the offense was undeniably strong.
The judges emphasized some of this evidence
. In particular, Alice Kintaro, Shaine Castro and Crisostomo himself all identified Crisostomo as driving a vehicle corresponding to the description of the one seen by Natalie Ocon.
The judges said that three people identified Crisostomo's voice during a call to 911 where Romero was heard pleading to be released, the judges said that the hair and fiber from the rented car were compatible with hair, leggings and fibers. complaining that his neck hurt, and asking to take his pants.
The judges said that without knowing either side, the 911 operator identified the female voice as Filipino and the male voice as local. On 6 February, at 6 am, the telephone used by Crisostomo in Marpi was put into service. The judges indicated that fingerprints corresponding to those of Crisostomo had been found at La Fiesta next to the marks of dredges.
witness attempted to sell a Blackberry torch shortly thereafter.
The judges noted Kehl's testimony of a probability of 1 in 960 million that the DNA found in Romero belonged to someone in the Chamorro population other than Crisostomo
Judges said the government notes that Crisostomo has taken a "everything but the kitchen-well" approach to the call, and that they are in agreement.
In addition, the judges pointed out that Crisostomo's briefing is littered with violations of the NIN Supreme Court's rules, peremptory statements, disappointing legal arguments and inaccuracies of the law.
Camacho presided over the trial and decided the charges of misdemeanor. He found the accused guilty of assault and disturbed the peace.
On April 24, 2014, the jury returned a guilty verdict against Crisostomo, then 40 years old, on the charges of first degree murder, kidnapping. On May 28, 2014, Camacho sentenced Crisostomo to life imprisonment.
Romero, 37, was last seen aboard a car near his home in Garapan early in the morning. February 5, 2012. She had to meet her boyfriend in Chalan Piao. Two days later, FBI agents found her body in a small bathroom at the abandoned La Fiesta mall in San Roque / As Matuis. The autopsy revealed that she had been beaten and strangled with a pair of leggings
[ad_2]
Source link
