United States Eighth Circuit

Defendant's capital conviction for kidnapping a victim and transporting her across state lines, resulting in death, is affirmed where: 1) a district court need not consider public opinion polls when ruling on change-of-venue motions; 2) the district court was not clearly erroneous in finding that certain jurors' statements, in context, did not establish actual prejudice; 3) the district court did not clearly err by accepting the government's race-neutral reasons for striking certain jurors; 4) the district court did not err in refusing to exclude a pathologist's testimony under Daubert because many pathologists shared the government pathologist's view of the reliability of the test performed; 5) the victim-impact testimony given in the penalty phase was neither quantitatively nor qualitatively overwhelming; and 6) the prosecution's closing argument did not improperly imply that defendant was required to prove a nexus between his mitigation evidence and his offense.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/22/2009
• Published 09/22/2009

Judges

• BENTON, Circuit Judge., Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, MELLOY and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Eighth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Robert Garold Hoy, argued, West Fargo, ND (Richard Ney, on the brief), Wichita, KS, for Defendant-Appellant., Drew Howard Wrigley, AUSA, Fargo, ND (Keith Reisenauer, on the brief), for Plaintiff-Appellee.