Stumpf v. Mitchell

367 F.3d 594 (2004)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Stumpf v. Mitchell

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
367 F.3d 594 (2004)

  • Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD

Facts

In 1984, Norman and Mary Jane Stout let John David Stumpf (appellant) and Clyde Wesley into their home supposedly to make a phone call. But Stumpf and Wesley pulled guns and announced a robbery. Stumpf shot Norman twice—but Norman survived to hear four shots that killed his wife in another room. Both robbers were apprehended, but not tried together, because Wesley was fighting extradition in another state. Meanwhile, Stumpf confessed and pleaded guilty to aggravated murder. The prosecutor argued during plea and sentencing proceedings that Stumpf must have killed Mary Jane because ballistics showed the same gun was used to shoot both victims. A three-judge panel found Stumpf had shot Mary Jane, and Stumpf received the death penalty. However, seven months later, the same prosecutor used a jailhouse confession to prove that Wesley—not Stumpf—shot Mary Jane. Wesley’s cellmate testified that Wesley confessed to shooting Mary Jane with Stumpf’s gun after Stumpf dropped it. Ballistics evidence supported that version of events because Wesley’s gun tended to jam after one round, suggesting he discarded it after firing one shot. The jury convicted Wesley of aggravated murder and recommended a sentence of 20 years to life. Stumpf appealed, arguing the prosecutor’s use of conflicting theories to convict both Stumpf and Wesley for the same murder violated due process.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Daughtrey, J.)

Dissent (Boggs, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 743,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 743,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 743,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership