Ex Parte Musgrove.
Cases that cite this one
58 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Lansdell v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2007)
- Lansdell v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2007)
- Sellers v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2005)
- Ex Parte Moffitt (Ala. 2002)
- Smith v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1996)
- Rieber v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1994)
- Goff v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1990)
- United States v. John Christopher Dobbs (11th Cir. 2020)
- Penn v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2014)
- Lockhart v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2013)
- Donald Dwayne Whatley v. State of Alabama. (Ala. Crim. App. 2010)
- Demetrius Avery Jackson, Jr. v. State of Alabama. (Ala. Crim. App. 2010)
- McCray v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2010)
- Scott v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2005)
- Adams v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2003)
- Vaughn v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2003)
- Lewis v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2003)
- Bivens v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2003)
- McGriff v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2001)
- Hagood v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2000)
- Jackson v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2000)
- Doggett v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2000)
- Smith v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2000)
- Broadnax v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2000)
- Jackson v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 2000)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
Phillip Musgrove was convicted of capital murder and kidnapping, Ala. Code 1975, §
The facts are set forth in the opinion of the Court of Criminal Appeals in this case,
Musgrove presents eight issues for our review.
The United States Supreme Court has held that in order for a federal constitutional error to be held harmless, the court must find beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not contribute to the conviction. Fahy v. Connecticut,
In the instant case, we find that the admission of the bayonet could not reasonably have contributed to the verdict. Musgrove admitted that he killed the victim and identified the knife that he had used. He also admitted that he carried a bayonet in his car, but testified that he did not use it on the victim. In addition, Musgrove's only defense was insanity. Thus, the only triable issue was whether Musgrove was legally culpable for his acts. Given these circumstances, we conclude that the admission of the bayonet into evidence could not reasonably have contributed to Musgrove's conviction and, therefore, was harmless.
AFFIRMED.
TORBERT, C.J., and MADDOX, JONES, SHORES, BEATTY, ADAMS and HOUSTON, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.