Browning v. Liberty Mutual Insurance

reviving the contemporaneous objection rule for the penalty phase, as well as guilt phase of a capital trial | ex-employee returned to restaurant, shot and killed two people, and injured another during course of an armed robbery | defendant shot and killed two people, and injured two people during the course of an armed robbery | defendant shot and killed two people, and injured two people during the course of an armed robbery | Johns Hopkins algorithm used; applying test similar to that stated in Daubert and affirming trial court’s ruling of nonadmissibility based on unreliability of polygraphs | defendant shot and killed two people, and injured two people during the course of an armed robbery | ". . . we hold that we will no longer consider alleged errors occurring in the penalty phase of a capital trial absent a contemporaneous objection." | defendant shot and killed two people, and injured two people during the course of an armed robbery | contemporaneous objection rule will apply to penalty-phase errors as well as guilt-stage errors in capital cases heard after the date of decision | “Under the FMLA, the employer’s duties are triggered when the employee provides enough information to put the employer on notice that the employee may be in need of FMLA leave.” | to determine whether underlying science of expert's testimony is reliable, court will look at several factors, including: (1) publications and peer review of technique; (2) prior application of method to type of evidence involved in case; (3 | whether juror is qualified to serve on death penalty case is within discretion of trial court and is not reviewable on appeal unless wholly unsupported by the evidence; responses of challenged jurors must be examined in light of entire voir dire | whether juror is qualified to serve on death penalty case is within discretion of trial court and is not reviewable on appeal unless wholly unsupported by the evidence; responses of challenged jurors must be examined in light of entire voir dire | ex-employee returned to restaurant, shot three employees and killed two | ex-employee returned to restaurant, shot three employees and killed two | where the defendant exercised only eight of the twelve peremptory challenges that he is given by La.C.Cr.P. art. 799, "we are not required to reach the issue of whether the trial judge erroneously denied the challenges for cause that are the subject of this assignment of error."