Whether the admission of a gruesome and unnecessary internal autopsy photograph, lacking probative value and showing post-crime mutilation by the medical examiner, violates the defendant's Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights

QUESTION PRESENTED Jessie Phillips was convicted of capital murder of two or more persons for killing his wife, Erica Phillips, who was six-to-eight weeks pregnant at the time of the offense. Both the jury and the trial court found the existence of only one aggravating circumstance — the death of two or more persons — and the trial court sentenced Mr. Phillips to death. During the trial, defense counsel conceded that Mrs. Phillips was pregnant at the time of the offense and presented no evidence to the contrary. The State also admitted a pregnancy test, as well as testimony from the medical examiner, to establish pregnancy. Despite this concession and the undisputed evidence of pregnancy, the State sought admission of an incredibly gruesome autopsy photograph of Mrs. Phillips’s mutilated uterus, ovaries, and fallopian tubes, removed from her body, carved open by the medical examiner, and placed on a table, still dripping blood. The trial court admitted this photograph and both the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals and the Alabama Supreme Court affirmed. The question presented is thus: In a capital case, does the admission of a gruesome and completely unnecessary internal autopsy photograph, lacking any probative value, and showing the postcrime mutilation by the medical examiner, violate a defendant’s Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process, a fair trial, and a reliable conviction and sentence? 1