Preview:

REPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 836 September Term, 1994

DIONNE CHEVELLE BROOKS

v.

STATE OF MARYLAND

Moylan, Davis, Getty, James S. (retired, specially assigned), JJ.

Opinion by Davis, J.

Filed: March 30, 1995

Appellant, Dionne Chevelle Brooks, was charged with several crimes relating to the death of Margaret Kobic. Following a jury

trial in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County (Fader, J.), appellant was convicted of first degree felony murder and robbery with a dangerous and deadly weapon. penalty. The State sought the death

After appellant waived her right to jury sentencing, the

court, sitting without a jury, imposed a sentence of life without parole for the felony murder conviction. was merged. Appellant presents three questions for our review, which we renumber for our convenience: I. Did the trial judge err when he refused to instruct the jury that all murder is presumed to be murder in the second degree? Did the consideration of the underlying felony of robbery in both the guilt/innocence and sentencing phases of appellant's trial violate her right under the Maryland Declaration of Rights and the federal constitution to be free from cruel and unusual punishment? The robbery conviction

II.

III. Was the trial judge's advice to appellant regarding her waiver of jury sentencing flawed, thus rendering the waiver ineffective?

FACTS
It is undisputed that appellant killed Margaret Kobic. The

central question for the jury was appellant's state of mind at the time of the homicide.

- 2 As a witness for the State, Sam Goodwin testified that he and his mother, Ms. Kobic, shared a two-bedroom apartment in Baltimore County. Goodwin was employed doing maintenance work and carpentry.

He kept a bucket of tools in his bedroom, including a carpenter's plane. In March of 1993, Goodwin became friends with Brooks while Before she was released

participating in a drug treatment program.

from the program, appellant told Goodwin that she "had nowhere to go," and he offered to let her stay with him and his mother. March 31, 1993, appellant moved into Goodwin's apartment. slept on the couch and let appellant use his bedroom. On April 2, 1993, Goodwin left for Pennsylvania to visit his son. On April 16, he spoke with appellant by phone, and told her According to Goodwin, On

Goodwin

that he planned to move to Pennsylvania.

both appellant and his mother were upset by his announced plans. After observing that his mother was intoxicated, Goodwin hung up on her. On Sunday, April 16, Goodwin returned to retrieve his

belongings and found his mother dead on the kitchen floor. was blood on the floor, walls, and ceiling.

There

Brooks was gone, but

Goodwin found her jacket on a path leading from the apartment complex to a nearby shopping center. forced entry. The police found no signs of

A crime lab technician testified that the victim was

lying on her back, with her clothing pulled up toward her neck. There was a massive head wound around the eye.

- 3 Dr. Anne Dixon, a medical examiner who supervised the autopsy, testified that there were multiple injuries to the right side of the head. Dr. Dixon estimated that there were at least twenty-five

separate blows, but added that the injuries were overlapping, and that it was impossible to make an accurate count. multiple skull fractures. Appellant testified on her own behalf. After learning that There were also

Goodwin intended to move, she and Kobic left the apartment to get liquor, cigarettes, and beer. Kobic used her ATM card to get Appellant stated

money, and appellant memorized the PIN number.

that she hoped to steal the card, and planned to buy drugs with money stolen from Kobic's account. Appellant and Kobic returned to the apartment and continued drinking. According to appellant, the pair quarrelled, and Kobic Kobic apologized, and the pair

slapped appellant in the face.

began to discuss their plans to live together after Goodwin moved out. At some point, Kobic allegedly touched appellant's breasts Appellant explained that this unwanted She responded by and wrapping an

without any warning.

touching made her feel "weird" and "creepy." hitting Kobic over the head with a bottle,

electrical cord around her neck.

Appellant then proceeded to

Goodwin's bedroom, retrieved his carpenter's plane, and struck Kobic repeatedly over the head. After she realized that Kobic was dead, appellant took jewelry from the body. She ransacked the bedroom and retrieved Kobic's

- 4 wallet, checkbook, and ATM card. and Goodwin's paycheck. She also took a television set

Before leaving the apartment, appellant

washed the blood from her hands and placed the plane, bottle, and electrical cord in a plastic bag, which she left in a dumpster. Over the next two days, appellant used the ATM card, pawned two rings, and purchased drugs with the money. turned herself in to the police. At trial, appellant On April 20, 1993, she

She later gave a full confession. that she was not criminally

argued

responsible for the killing.

Pamela Taylor, a social worker,

testified that appellant was reared in a dysfunctional family and had suffered for years from sexual and physical abuse. According

to Taylor, one of appellant's stepfathers forced her to have intercourse with him from the time she was thirteen years old. He

also tried to sodomize her and threatened to kill family members if she told anyone what he had done. At the age of fifteen, appellant

became pregnant with her stepfather's child, had an abortion, and thereafter attempted suicide. Appellant also offered the testimony of Dr. Stephen Siebert, a psychiatrist. According to Dr. Siebert, appellant suffers from

a borderline personality disorder arising from the trauma of her childhood abuse. Appellant's already-vulnerable personality was

weakened by years of substance abuse, which yielded paranoid symptoms. As a result, Dr. Siebert explained, appellant "snapped"

when Kobic touched her, because she perceived the touching of her breasts as a "prelude to rape." Dr. Harminder Mallik, the State's

- 5 expert witness, also testified that appellant suffered from a mental disorder. In his view, however, appellant knew what she was

doing and did not lack the capacity to control her conduct. A jury convicted appellant of first degree felony murder and robbery with a dangerous and deadly weapon. She was acquitted on

charges of first degree premeditated murder, as well as second degree murder. The State sought the death penalty, and appellant The only aggravating

waived her right to a jury sentencing.

circumstance was the fact that appellant committed the murder during the course of a robbery. by the judge included The mitigating circumstances found surrender and subsequent

appellant's

confession, the "horrible" circumstances of appellant's upbringing, the absence of any prior criminal history involving a crime of violence, and the fact that the murder was not premeditated.1 After weighing the circumstances, the judge sentenced appellant to life without parole. This appeal followed.

LEGAL ANALYSIS I

The judge rejected appellant's assertion that the murder was committed while her capacity to appreciate the criminality of the conduct or to conform her conduct to the requirements of the law was substantially impaired as a result of mental incapacity, mental disorder or emotional disturbance. See MD. ANN. CODE art. 27,

Download Brooks v. State.pdf

Maryland Law