Date: 28.8.2017 / Article Rating: 5 / Votes: 760
Gm.professay.info #Research paper outline plans

Recent Posts

Home >> Uncategorized >> Research paper outline plans

Research paper outline plans

Oct/Fri/2017 | Uncategorized








Guidelines for successful Research Paper Outline pdf 0 64 Кб

Research paper outline plans

Best Essay Writers Here -
What is a preliminary outline for a research paper? |…

Micro Essay Final Self Assessment. Outline? Please complete the following check list: The header includes: your teacher (class) name, your name, date) Does the essay question include t he micro feature and a clause on how meaning/emotion is how to a tma, communicated? Have you the introduced the film? Have you identified the Film Title (Date) Director? Introduced the sequence? Have you included your time references? Do your paragraphs make sense? On one topic set out in the topic sentence?

Include clearly described examples (adjectives)? Do you revisit the research paper question at the end of the essays paragraph and link your analysis back to the significance? Presentation format Are your screenshots (text wrapping) set to paper outline plans #8216;tight#8217;? Will they be cut off when you print? Have you double spaced your paragraphs? Is your line spacing set to 1.5? Have you proof read your essay including spell check and punctuation check. Capital letters, commas, full stops#8230; You might use Google Translate to read it back to you. LIFE HACK. If you are unsure what each means please check in with your teacher in the 1-1 feedback this week. It is not for your teacher to format, proof read of spell check you essay.

They will give you feedback on how to improve your TEAS but the responsibility for coke vs pepsi case, the content and look of the essay is yours. This is an opportunity for you to plans have a close look at an A grade essay and explore the specific features of that analysis and then look at how you can improve your own work ready for draft 2, which is due next Monday, 6th March. Case? Please watch the sequence from Red Dragon (2002) Ratner , in which Will Graham (Ed Norton), enters the crime scene. Paper Outline Plans? Remember the focus for this essay was sound . Now read one of the paragraphs in the essay above and find an example of good textual analysis , which you should copy paste it into the shared document for your class: Then you should then highlight your selected sections as follows: terms in red, examples in blue , analysis green and significance in yellow. Republic Congo Essay? Please highlight do not change the text colour as I have done (I can#8217;t highlight in research paper outline WordPress). Once you have done this you should carefully reread your own essay and again highlight i t in resume the same way. Find a section of research outline, your essay, which you think you can improve, copy it into how to a tma the same document, with annotations of paper, how it could be improved to be as good as the exemplar. We will be looking at coke vs pepsi case essays this document collectively and discussing your annotations to ensure you understand what these features look like. Identify where there is room for improvement in draft 2, which should be the paper outline following: Your use of technical terminology, is it accurate and/or sufficient? Are you using clearly described examples from the sequence?

Are you using appropriate analysis terminology (not just #8216;shows#8217;) and are you linking the specific example to audience responses ? Have you explored how the examples and analysis contribute to development of character (positioning), highlighting important narrative information, reflecting themes and research important ideas#8230;does it answer your question? Put these targets are the top of research paper outline, your essay as #8216;Draft 1 Targets#8217; and redraft ready for peer assessment next week. Here are three essays from previous students that we will be looking at as examples of good practice. Research? Micro Essay Developing Your Essay Title. Here are the outline plans deadlines for the micro essay: Draft 1: Monday 27th February (Self Assessment) Draft 2: Monday 6th March (Peer Assessment) Draft 3: Monday 13th March (Teacher Assessment) Final Draft: Friday 24th March.

Before you make a start on draft 1 you should set yourself a question to answer. This question should state: Film (date) Director. The #8216;name#8217; of the sequence. Name the resume micro feature(s) which you are going to describe analyse. Show that you understand the purpose and paper outline tone of the scene. So for example here are a few from anne to my and loving, previous students: How is sound used to represent and paper plans construct characters#8217; personalities and motives in ‘The Twisted Nerve’ scene in Kill Bill Vol.1 (2003) Tarantino? How does sound create a sense of disaster and crisis in the “Jerusalem Wall Scene” in World War Z (2013) Forster.

How does performance in the ‘Pass the Asparagus’ sequence from American Beauty (1999) Mendes, show the disintegration of the family and write tension between characters? How does cinematography in the #8216;Black Swan#8217; sequence from Black Swan (2010) Aronofsky to convey the disturbing contrast between Nina as the White Swan and Nina as the Black Swan? How does mise en scene and cinematography create a sense of panic and relationships between characters in ‘Hover Board Chase Scene’ from Back to the Future II (1989) Zemeckis. Here is a handout on how to introduce and structure the essay. It also describes the outline assessment criteria and gives some other example essay titles. Coke Case Study Essays? Ask yourself a question on outline plans, the sequence that you are going to explore and analyse in the micro essay. Once you have chosen your sequence you should: Watch the whole film (again) to understand the place of your scene in the narrative character development. You should think carefully here, about the purpose of the scene in the film.

Watch your sequence through several times and write a tma brainstorm the #8217;emotional impact, information (genre, character narrative)#8217;. Complete a textual analysis sheet for research outline plans, one or two of the micro areas in which you are identifying how the micro technique links to impact information. Democratic? Please use the links below to access the textual analysis sheets. You may complete these online or by printing them out and research paper completing them by coke essays hand. The last piece of coursework is the micro analysis. It#8217;s worth the last 30 marks of your coursework. A micro analysis requires you to study a sequence from a film in minute detail. You are required to analyse how the film makers have used#8230; #8230;to communicate meaning to paper an audience. Please note we do not recommend performance analysis essays to students and so no one will be revising this. If you want to be made an exception you must speak to your teacher they may permit you to review this micro area instead of the other ones. In essence you have to reverse engineer a film and consider how the characters are represented, how the narrative develops, how the film works in bradstreet dear essay relation to it genre and expectations and outline plans most importantly how the audience is made to feel respond to the sequence . A Tma? Your job during the next lesson (when we are moderating year 13 coursework) will be to revise one of four micro features and find examples of how they have been used in this clip from Kill Bill (2003) Tarantino: Some monsters to thrill, scare and delight you.

Why do we like to scare ourselves? A key features of any horror film is the plans monster. The monster is said to represent the fears, anxieties and concerns of society at that time . So to understand how these British films reflect the fears of Britain, we have got to understand the monsters that feature in both films. To start developing your understanding we are going to essay look at research paper some classic monsters and consider their character as well as what social fear they represent. How To Write? In pairs, do some research and develop a monster profile for your allocated monster. Read the article on paper plans, page 56 of speed, this issue of the paper outline Media Magazine and find the following information: What animal appearance did the original vampire, Nosferatu, have? What two films from the 60s, named in the article, reflected a more #8216;Freudian#8217; approach to horror monsters? What does Freudian mean? What three social changes did horror reflect, between the two world wars? Name four cultural and case study essays social changes that were reflected in horror films from the 1970s.

Name five changes to paper outline films and/or the ways which film reflect contemporary audiences in more recent horror films. We#8217;re going to do an essay on the sound and music from this sequence The Return of the Jedi (1983) Marquand , from the beginning to 5.04. Watch through the clip and make notes using a copy of this document to make your notes. They key to this is to describe the examples of the various sounds from your text clearly. Here is a blog with some useful ideas about how to describe music. The essay title is: How does dialogue, sound effects and music contribute to the audience#8217;s understanding of the challenges and dilemmas that Luke faces in his final confrontation with The Emperor and Darth Vader in The Return of the vs pepsi case essays Jedi (1983) Marquand?

You should write approximately 750 1,000 words. Outline? The deadline is Monday 31st October. Democratic Republic Congo? Sound is research, a vital component of film. You need to be able to describe all the elements of sound that feature in essay a film. Here is a diagram of research, those elements that you need to describe and democratic republic analyse. Here is the slideshow show we used in class to illustrate some of these features: Studying performance is quite tough, but may suit students who are also studying Theatre Studies.

Here is the slideshow on the ways to research paper explore Performance in Film: We will be looking at a short sequence from Les Miserables and analysing the performance of two characters Cosette Madame Thenadier. A useful supercurricular video on an introduction to Method Acting a very common approach use by film actors to #8216;inhabit#8217; a character: If you#8217;re going to study performances, you may do well to choose a film that features some of these great performers.

Best Custom Academic Essay Writing Help & Writing Services UK Online -
Research Outline Writing Service | Pro-Papers com

paul powell resume Executed March 18, 2010 9:09 p.m. by Electric Chair in Virginia. 11th murderer executed in U.S. in 2010. 1199th murderer executed in U.S. since 1976. 1st murderer executed in Virginia in 2010. 106th murderer executed in research plans, Virginia since 1976.

(Race/Sex/Age at speed paper, Murder-Execution) (Race/Sex/Age at research outline plans, Murder) Powell described how he went to the home of anne bradstreet to my and loving husband essay, 16 year old Stacie Reed because he was angry at her for having a black boyfriend. He attempted to outline plans rape her and democratic congo essay then stabbed her in the heart when she fought off his advances. Afterward, Powell went downstairs, smoked a cigarette, drank some iced tea and waited for her 14 year old sister, Kristie, to come home from school. When she arrived, he raped her, slit her throat, stabbed her and left her for dead. When police reached her, they asked who had done this to her.

Kristie mouthed two words: Paul Powell. Kristie survived and testified against Powell. Powell's first capital murder conviction was thrown out on appeal when the court ruled that there was insufficient evidence to prove that he had attempted to rape Stacie. Believing he no longer could face a death sentence, he wrote the Prosecutor an abusive letter in which he admitted he attempted to rape Stacie and research paper plans boasted about the crimes in horrific detail. Powell v. Commonwealth , 552 S.E.2d 344 (Va. Case Study. 2001) (Direct Appeal-Reversed). Powell v. Research Plans. Commonwealth , 590 S.E.2d 537 (Va. 2004) (Direct Appeal). Powell v. Warden of Sussex I State Prison , 634 S.E.2d 289 (Va.

2006) (State Habeas). Powell v. Kelly , 562 F.3d 656 (4th Cir. 2009) (Federal Habeas). Not released to the public. Powell executed for teen’s 1999 murder in Manassas, by Frank Green. How To Write A Tma. (March 19, 2010) JARRATT -- Paul Warner Powell died in the electric chair last night for the 1999 capital murder of a 16-yearold girl in her Manassas-area home.

Powell, 31, was sentenced to death for the Jan. 29, 1999, slaying of Stacie Reed, who was stabbed to death with a survival knife. After killing her, Powell then waited for her 14-year-old sister to paper return home from school, raped her, cut her throat, and resume left her for dead. Kristie Reed lived and testified against him. Given a chance to make a last statement, Powell declined. The girls' mother, Lorraine Reed Whoberry, and Kristie were among the witnesses to Powell's electrocution. He was pronounced dead at 9:09 p.m., Larry Traylor, spokesman for the Virginia Department of Corrections, said outside the Greensville Correctional Center where executions are carried out. A half-dozen members of Virginians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty held a candlelight vigil in a field near the prison. They prayed for Stacie Reed and expressed their opposition to the death penalty. On Wednesday, Stacie's loved ones got to hear Powell express something for which they had waited 11 years: He said he was sorry.

Whoberry, who now lives in Cincinnati and was in the Richmond area on research outline, her way to witness the execution, revealed yesterday that she had a conference call with Powell the previous day. He was able to say he was sorry, and he made the point several times that [the crime] was senseless, it was pointless. . . Dear. . He couldn't really give us a reason why, she said. Research Paper Plans. I think it was heartfelt. Democratic. It wasn't a big to-do thing. It was just a simplistic, 'I'm sorry,' and I accept that, Whoberry said. Powell's lawyer Jonathan P. Sheldon said immediately after the execution that the man that was executed tonight was a different person from the person who committed these crimes 10 years ago.

Sheldon said Powell was extremely remorseful and knew he was the only one to blame for what happened. Prince William County Commonwealth's Attorney Paul B. Ebert, a witness to the execution, said: It's a relief he won't be able to taunt any victims anymore. Whoberry's call with Powell was made in Sheldon's Fairfax County office and was attended by Kristie and other family members. Whoberry said one of her sisters, Theresa Davidson of Texas, kind of facilitated the research paper outline plans, conversation. The call lasted, with some interruptions, for an hour to an hour and a half. As the conversation went on, he was able to open up a little bit more.

He wasn't belligerent, he didn't raise his voice. It was very civil, she said. The questions that we asked, he answered to the best of paper, his ability. I did ask him at some point if he had forgiven himself, and paper he got emotional and he said, 'No.' And I said, 'Well, I hope your relationship with God is something that you can work through . . . Paper. before tomorrow night,' and research we let him know that we are praying for him and his mom, his family, Whoberry said. Sheldon said last night that he and anne to my dear and loving essay Whoberry hoped to work together to research outline get legislation passed that would enable loved ones to visit with inmates on death row. He said that the conference call was so productive for both sides. Democratic Essay. . . . It allowed him to take responsibility and to show remorse. Plans. However, he said, it being over the telephone took something away from it. Whoberry said she has forgiven Powell, for her own sake, and write a tma that she had hoped to meet with him. Authorities denied permission for a meeting with Powell, who was abusive toward the family and law-enforcement officials in letters after his arrest.

Powell's first capital murder conviction was thrown out on appeal. The Supreme Court of Virginia ruled that even with Kristie's rape, Powell had to have raped or attempted to rape Stacie to be convicted of capital murder. Believing he no longer could face a death sentence, he wrote Ebert an paper plans abusive letter in which he admitted he attempted to job objective rape Stacie and boasted about the crimes in horrific detail. The letter provided grounds for Powell to be tried again for outline plans capital murder and sentenced to anne death. All of outline plans, his appeals were rejected, and how to write a tma Gov. Bob McDonnell turned down his clemency request last week. Paper Outline. Powell boasted about the crimes in his letter to Ebert. It was heart-wrenching to read that letter. To know a lot of the details that we couldn't prove or didn't know in the first trial, Whoberry said earlier yesterday at a news conference in Henrico County.

It was horrible, but I also knew he had signed his own death warrant, she said. The news conference also was attended by Kristie, Whoberry's husband, her mother and how to two sisters, all of whom were slated to witness the execution. Paper. This is the day we've been waiting for, for 11 years, Whoberry said yesterday afternoon. My Best Friend 8. There really aren't any words to express how I feel right now. . . . I know that for myself, it's been a long road. Hopefully, when this is paper plans done and it is final, we can look back and find the positive things that came out of essay, this that we strived so hard to research make happen. My thoughts and prayers go out to research his family.

This is going to close a chapter in paper outline, this journey that we've been on, she said. I can't imagine what he is feeling, she said around 4 p.m. But, again, it was his decision to do what he did, not mine. I know that justice will be served according to essay whatever God has in paper, mind for him. Powell chose to die in the electric chair instead of by how to write injection. Virginia death row inmates were given the choice starting in 1995. If an inmate refuses to choose, injection becomes the default method. Two cycles of electricity are used in executions, each lasting 90 seconds with a slight pause between them. Since the research paper plans, choice was made available, 76 inmates have died by injections and essay 8 now six by electrocution. Powell's execution was the 106th in Virginia since the U.S.

Supreme Court allowed the death penalty to paper resume in 1976. His death leaves 12 men and one woman sentenced to death in the state. Traylor said Powell spent his last day meeting with his immediate family members and my best 8 lawyers. He said Powell has spiritual advisers, but as of early yesterday afternoon he had not met with them. Before the execution yesterday, Ebert said the process has been difficult for Stacie Reed's family.

He said that after the execution, I'm hopeful they will have some solace and some closure and will go on about their lives. Man who bragged about crime executed, by Dena Potter. (Associated Press March 19, 2010) JARRATT - A man who killed a teen girl and then bragged about it to prosecutors once he thought he could not face the death penalty was executed Thursday. Paul Warner Powell, 31, died by electrocution at 9:09 p.m. at Greensville Correctional Center in Jarratt. He chose electrocution rather than lethal injection.

Powell appeared emotionless as guards strapped him to the oak chair and attached metal clamps to his right calf and paper head. When asked if he had any last words, he remained silent and my best essay for class 8 stared at plans, the ceiling. Powell was convicted in 2000 and sentenced to death for fatally stabbing 16-year-old Stacie Reed of Manassas. He also raped and attempted to kill her 14-year-old sister. The Virginia Supreme Court overturned that verdict, and Powell wrote a taunting letter to prosecutors detailing the crime. He was convicted again in republic essay, 2003. In his four-page, profanity-laced letter to paper Prince William County Commonwealth's Attorney Paul Ebert, Powell described how he went to Stacie's house because he was angry at her for coke case study essays having a black boyfriend. He wrote that he attempted to rape her and then stabbed her in the heart when she fought off his advances. Afterward, Powell went downstairs, smoked a cigarette, drank some iced tea and waited for her younger sister, Kristie, to come home from school.

He raped her, slit her throat, stabbed her and research paper plans left her for study essays dead. Research Paper Outline Plans. Kristie survived and testified against Powell. The Associated Press usually does not identify victims of sexual assault, but Kristie, now 25, gave permission for her name to be used. Kristie and the girls' mother, Lorraine Whoberry, witnessed the execution with Ebert, who said he believed they got some solace from the execution. Being able to job objective witness him leave the research plans, earth was an emotional experience for for class them, but an experience that gave them a lot of relief, he said. Earlier Thursday, Whoberry remembered Stacie as a friendly, headstrong girl who decided as a freshman in high school she wanted to outline be the essay for class, first female Navy SEAL and a week later shaved off all her hair.

During an afternoon news conference, Whoberry said she hoped the execution would close a chapter in the journey we've been on. Kristie declined to make a statement. Later, the family told the research paper, Richmond Times Dispatch that they talked with Powell by phone for more than an hour on Wednesday. He was able to say he was sorry, and how to write a tma he made the research outline, point several times that (the crime) was senseless, it was pointless . he couldn't really give us a reason why, Whoberry told the for class, newspaper. It was just a simplistic, 'I'm sorry,' and outline plans I accept that. Whoberry said Powell told her he had not forgiven himself and she told him she hoped he could reconcile with God before the speed research, execution. We let him know that we are praying for him and research outline plans his mom, his family, she said. Powell's attorney, Jonathan Sheldon, said Powell was extremely remorseful for my best friend for class his crime. When asked why Powell did not make a final statement, Sheldon said, He made a last minute decision and said, 'You know, the people who need to hear from me heard from me.' Powell was the research outline plans, second consecutive Virginia inmate to choose electrocution over lethal injection.

Larry Bill Elliott was electrocuted in November. Sheldon said many inmates fear that the three-drug lethal cocktail used in injections won't be administered correctly and that they'll suffocate. If not done properly, an inmate could be paralyzed by one of the three drugs used and yet conscious while another of the drugs kills, Sheldon said. Of the 35 death penalty states, seven Southern states still offer electrocution. Powell was the 106th Virginia inmate executed since the U.S.

Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976. Job Objective Resume. Only Texas, with 451, has executed more inmates. Virginia executes man in 1999 murder of woman, rape of her sister, by Josh White. Outline. (March 19, 2010) Kristie Reed was on the basement floor, her throat and wrists slashed. Resume. Her older sister, Stacie, was upstairs, dead from a stab wound to the heart. When police reached Kristie, who was then 14 years old, an officer leaned in and asked who had done this to her. Kristie mouthed two words: Paul Powell. On Thursday night, more than 11 years later, Paul Warner Powell, 31, was executed in Virginia's electric chair. Plans. He was declared dead at 9:09 p.m. The Jan.

29, 1999, murder of one sister and the rape and near-slaying of the other in Manassas were among the most notorious crimes in the region's recent history. Besides the essay 8, savage attacks, the case was known for Powell's boastful jailhouse letter to Prince William County's chief prosecutor, which provided the crucial evidence that resulted in Thursday's execution. But it was Kristie Reed's eyewitness account that led to Powell's arrest and admission just hours after the slaying. She is left with decade-old memories of her sister and a neck laced with what she calls battle scars. Formerly against the death penalty, Kristie eagerly awaited Powell's execution. I need to know that he's gone, that we don't have to outline deal with this anymore, said Kristie Reed, now 25 and speed paper an advocate for rape victims. I was totally against the death penalty before this happened, and I didn't know why people would want to do it. But those people haven't been through what we've been through.

Now I'm totally for it. He definitely deserves to outline die. He needs to die for democratic republic congo essay what he did to Stacie. In the end, Powell was silent. The man who was defiant throughout the legal proceedings decided to research say nothing after guards strapped him into the oak electric chair in the Greensville Correctional Center. He stared ahead when asked whether he wanted to say anything. Stacie's and Kristie's mother, Lorraine Reed Whoberry, said that the family spoke with Powell by phone Wednesday and that he expressed remorse in his own way. Powell acknowledged that the crime was a senseless and pointless thing and said he was sorry, she said.

The family witnessed Powell's execution, and speed research paper Whoberry said she was glad she did because now she knows he is gone. Justice was served, and this chapter has closed, she said. It has been a long decade for research outline Kristie Reed and job objective Whoberry, who have suffered through nearly unbelievable twists and turns. Paper. Powell had taunted them with vulgar letters from jail that included threats to kill them. And the legal case was emotional and difficult. After Kristie Reed took the stand to anne bradstreet husband testify against Powell in 2000 -- she never looked him in the eye -- prosecutors secured the first conviction and death sentence. At the hearing in which the judge imposed the jury's sentence, the research paper, forewoman testified on Powell's behalf, saying that she loved him and had made the wrong decision. In 2001, the a tma, Virginia Supreme Court threw out Powell's death sentence, ruling that the murder of one girl and the rape of another could not be considered the same crime -- a factor necessary for the death penalty.

After the ruling, Powell wrote an insulting letter to prosecutors. But in it, he admitted that he had tried to research paper rape Stacie Reed, too. Democratic Congo Essay. That admission tied Stacie's attempted rape to research paper her slaying and led prosecutors to re-indict him. He was convicted and anne bradstreet to my dear sentenced to death a second time after another full trial in 2003. Through it all, Powell egged on Prince William County Commonwealth's Attorney Paul B. Ebert, who has now sent 10 people to Virginia's death chamber, nearly 10 percent of all people executed in the state since capital punishment was reinstated in 1982. Usually unflappable, this case has brought Ebert to outline tears at study essays, times and has made him so close to the Reeds that they consider him part of their family. Post reporter recounts Paul Powell's execution, by Josh White. Paper Outline Plans. (March 19, 2010; 8:00 AM) I was on the scene in Manassas on Jan. 29, 1999, shortly after 16-year-old Stacie Reed was murdered and her younger sister was raped and nearly killed in their home. Friend Essay. It was the first major crime I covered for The Post.

The crime itself was shocking: Two young girls brutally attacked in their own home by a man not. much younger than I was. It began an 11-year journey that included nearly unbelievable twists at almost every stage of the research, case against Paul Warner Powell, who was executed in my best friend for class 8, Virginia on Thursday night. Outline Plans. The trial is the only time I’ve ever seen a member of the jury testify on behalf of the anne dear, defendant. It is the only case I’ve covered during which the defendant sent vulgar and research outline intimidating letters to the family of his victims.

And it is the bradstreet to my husband essay, only case I’ve ever heard of that involved a defendant beating his death sentence -- only to turn around and admit additional elements of the crime to paper plans a prosecutor, which then led to another death sentence. It was also one of those rare cases in which there was no question who the assailant was -- Kristie. Reed survived the attack and identified Powell -- and that he did, in fact, commit the democratic republic congo essay, crime. There was overwhelming physical evidence, and research plans he fully confessed shortly after he was caught. The case came to a conclusion with Powell’s execution in Virginia’s death chamber at the Greensville Correctional Center in Jarratt. He was 31 years old. Bradstreet Dear Husband Essay. I have previously described an electrocution in Virginia’s electric chair, as I witnessed Larry Bill Elliott’s execution in November. This one was quite similar. Powell was moved from death row at outline, nearby Sussex I prison in southern Virginia a few days before the execution and put in how to write a tma, one of three cells that directly adjoin the death chamber in Greensville’s “L Unit.” There, leading up to his death, he was able to paper outline meet with with his mother and brother and his lawyers.

On Wednesday, Powell spoke to Kristie Reed and her mother, Lorraine Reed Whoberry, in a meeting that Powell’s lawyer, Jon Sheldon, arranged. My Best Essay For Class 8. The family went to Sheldon’s office in Fairfax and was able to speak with Powell by phone. Research Paper Outline Plans. Whoberry said Powell was remorseful “in his own way,” stumbling through an apology during which he said the crime was “senseless and pointless.” But the man who had sent Whoberry a naked photograph of a woman and compared her to coke case essays her dead daughter, and who sent obscenity-laced letters to prosecutors, was this week taking responsibility and saying he was sorry. Sheldon said the outline plans, phone call was “very, very powerful” and showed Powell’s understanding that what he did was horrifying and shameful. But the to my dear essay, phone call produced no answer to paper plans why the attack happened. “There is no why,” Sheldon said. How To. “He was rejected by everyone in his life, he had no real friends and no family support. There isn’t a satisfying answer and it’s extremely frustrating.

Stacie rejected Paul, and for very good reason. He just couldn’t take another rejection.” Powell spent Thursday preparing to die. His head was shaved, as was his right leg, where sponge-lined contacts are placed to complete an electrical circuit. Sheldon said Powell barely ate, and his last meal request was not released to the public.

Media witnesses entered the death chamber at 8:40 p.m. We were led into a small room inside the chamber. The room is lined with reinforced glass and has 20 hard plastic chairs in research outline, four tiered rows that face the write, electric chair. At 8:53 p.m., Powell, handcuffed, entered the room with four guards through a door to research the right of the room. He wore the same light blue shirt and dark blue pants that all condemned inmates in Virginia wear. The right pants leg was cut off above the knee. My Best Friend For Class. He wore flip-flops. Powell looked gaunt and research plans pale.

He had a stern look and held his chin high. He was placed in the chair and a total of six guards affixed eight straps around his ankles, wrists, upper arms, waist and chest. A clamp was attached to his right leg below the knee, and a metal skullcap was placed on his head with a chin strap. Powell swallowed hard and anne dear husband his eyes darted around the room. At 8:58 p.m., an official switched on a microphone in the room and Powell was asked if he had anything to say. He just stared straight ahead and said nothing. A minute later, a face mask was put in place, covering him from forehead to chin with just his nose exposed. A guard wiped his face and leg with a white towel. After a key was turned in the far right rear of the room, activating the system, a man concealed in research outline, an adjoining room hit the “execute” button on a machine that was described as being about the size of a top-loading clothes washer. Paper. It was precisely 9 p.m.

There was a thump as Powell’s body jerked back into research outline plans the chair. His hands clenched into congo essay tight fists and veins swelled as his arms turned red. Research Plans. Smoke rose from his leg. Officials said 1800 volts at 7.5 amps -- about 13,500 watts, or enough to power 135 100-watt lightbulbs -- flowed through his body for 30 seconds. That was followed by 240 volts at 1 amp for essays 60 seconds.

The cycle repeated. With the paper plans, second major jolt, smoke and job objective sparks emitted from Powell’s right leg. Research Paper. His knee appeared to swell and turn purple. His knuckles went white. At 9:03, the anne to my and loving essay, electricity stopped. Everyone waited in silence for five minutes. Research Paper Plans. At 9:08, a guard walked up to Powell and opened his shirt. A doctor emerged from a door on the left side of the room and placed a stethoscope on Powell’s chest in anne bradstreet husband, search of a heartbeat. There was none. He was pronounced dead at 9:09 p.m., and a curtain was drawn. Whoberry and Reed watched the execution from research paper outline plans behind one-way glass.

They were joined by Commonwealth’s Attorney Paul B. Democratic Republic Congo Essay. Ebert, who has sent 10 criminals to death in Virginia, nearly 10 percent of all the people executed since Virginia restarted executions in 1982. Ebert witnessed his first execution in November, when sniper John Allen Muhammad was executed by research plans lethal injection. Essay. Three more people Ebert has prosecuted are on Virginia’s death row, and another committed suicide before he was executed. Ebert said that to him, lethal injection was an anticlimax, as it appeared Muhammad simply went to research outline plans sleep. Electrocution, Ebert said, appeared to have more finality to it. “It was a little more vivid,” Ebert said afterward. “It felt more meaningful and impressive. Coke Case Essays. But it was still a much more gentle death than Stacie’s.” Richard Leonard, who as a Prince William County police detective interrogated Powell and elicited his confession in 1999, also witnessed the execution and said that it put to rest an 11-year saga and paper plans one of the worst cases he’s seen in a career that spans more than three decades. “It involved kids. It was horrible,” Leonard said. “It was such a senseless, terrible thing that happened to a nice family. It changed all of their lives. … All of these cases are bad, but everyone has one case that haunts them for a long period of time. This is resume that case.” Paul Powell dies in outline, electric chair, by Amanda Stewart. (March 18, 2010)

JARRATT, Va.—Paul Warner Powell, who killed a 16-year-old Yorkshire girl and bragged about coke study it in a letter to prosecutors, was put to death in Virginia’s electric chair Thursday. Powell, 31, was pronounced dead at paper outline plans, 9:09 p.m. at the Greensville Correctional Center in Jarratt. He did not make statement. Powell spent his last hours meeting with his immediate family and attorneys, Virginia Department of Corrections spokesman Larry Traylor said. Coke Vs Pepsi Case. Traylor said Powell made a last meal request, but asked that it not be made public. Powell was sentenced to die for killing and attempting to rape 16-year-old Stacie Reed. On Jan. 29, 1999, Powell entered the Reeds’ Yorkshire home and confronted Stacie, who was home alone after school, stabbed her and stomped on her throat until she died. Powell said he was angry that Stacie had a black boyfriend. Powell then waited in research paper outline, the house, drinking iced tea and smoking a cigarette, until 14-year-old Kristie came home from school.

He tied her up, raped her and my best essay for class 8 stabbed her and paper left her to die in the basement. Kristie survived and testified against my best friend 8, Powell. Research Plans. Now 25, Kristie witnessed Powell’s execution, alongside her mother, Lorraine Reed Whoberry. On Wednesday, a day before Powell was set to anne bradstreet to my and loving husband die, Whoberry said she and her family were ready for the execution to happen and to “close a chapter” in their lives. “We’re all kind of paper, anxious, not knowing what to expect,“ Whoberry said. Speed Research. “I’m trying not to go with any expectations. I’m just hoping I can get through this and be strong for paper outline Kristie.“ Whoberry, who started the S.T.A.C.I.E. Foundation to tell her family’s story in seminars to coke case law enforcement agencies around the country, said she has forgiven Powell, but felt the research paper outline plans, execution was necessary for justice to coke study be served. Whoberry told the Richmond Times Dispatch that they talked with Powell by phone for more than an hour on Wednesday. “He was able to say he was sorry, and he made the research plans, point several times that (the crime) was senseless, it was pointless . Write A Tma. he couldn’t really give us a reason why,“ Stacie’s mother, Lorraine Whoberry, told the newspaper. “It was just a simplistic, ‘I’m sorry,‘ and I accept that.“ Whoberry said Powell told her he had not forgiven himself and she told him she hoped he could reconcile with God before the outline, execution. “We let him know that we are praying for him and his mom, his family,“ she said. Whoberry and her family, who now live in my best for class, Ohio, also traveled to the area last July to attend Powell’s execution.

That time, the United States Supreme Court issued a stay until they could decide whether to hear Powell’s case. In January, the high court decided it would not intervene. Plans. Last week, Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell also said he would not stay the execution. It was the first capital case to come before the new governor. Powell was first convicted of anne to my dear and loving husband, capital murder in 2000, but the Virginia Supreme Court overturned that conviction. Then, thinking he could no longer face the death penalty, Powell wrote a taunting letter to Prince William Commonwealth’s Attorney Paul Ebert, giving him new evidence by describing how he attempted to rape Stacie. Ebert again indicted Powell for capital murder and in 2003, Powell was convicted and sentenced to die. Ebert—who has put more men on paper outline plans, death row than any other prosecutor in the state—also witnessed Powell’s execution. After the execution, Powell’s attorney, John Sheldon said Powell was “remorseful” in the hours and days leading up to his death. “The man that we executed tonight was a different person than the case, person who committed those crimes ten years ago,“ Sheldon said. “He was very remorseful and very aware that he brought this on himself.“

Ebert witnessed Powell’s execution Thursday, alongside Kristie Reed and her mother. “I can’t speak for research outline plans the family, but my sense is resume this will give them solace and closure,“ Ebert said.“They can go on with their lives.“ Powell was the 106th Virginia inmate executed since capital punishment was reinstated in the United States in 1976. Now there are 13 inmates on death row including two, Justin Wolfe and Joshua Andrews, both 28, who were convicted in Prince William County. In January 1999, Robert Culver and his fiance, Lorraine Reed, lived together in outline, a small brick home on McLean Street in Manassas, Virginia, with Reed's two daughters, Stacey Lynn Reed and Kristie Erin Reed. On January 29, 1999, Paul Warner Powell, then 20, went to visit the Reeds' home. Powell was carrying two knives and a 9 mm handgun. Stacey, then 16 years old, left home to my best essay for class go to work, and Powell remained there alone with Kristie, who was 14. That afternoon, Kristie called her mother by telephone and informed her that Powell refused to leave the home. Kristie's mother told Kristie to order Powell to leave. Research Paper Plans. Kristie was concerned because Powell kept walking back and forth down the hallway looking in the rooms.

On the afternoon of January 29, 1999, Kristie arrived home from school and was startled to find Powell in her house. She asked Powell where Stacey was. He replied, she was in her room. Coke Study. Kristie walked to Stacey's room, but Stacey was not there. Research Outline. Then, Kristie turned to enter her own room and saw Stacey's body lying on how to, the floor.

Powell, who had followed Kristie to the bedroom ordered Kristie to go downstairs to the basement. Research Paper Plans. Kristie knew that Powell customarily armed himself with a knife. She had previously observed Powell with a butterfly knife and another long knife that was in a brown pouch type thing. Powell forced Kristie to accompany him to the basement, where he ordered her to remove her clothes. Speed Research Paper. She took her clothes off because she didn't want to die. Powell told Kristie to lay on research paper, the floor, and then he raped her. After Powell raped Kristie, he dressed himself, and he used shoelaces taken from Kristie's shoes to tie her feet together. He also used shoelaces to tie her arms behind her back.

Someone knocked on the door to the house, and Powell went upstairs, leaving Kristie naked and bound on the basement floor. While Powell was upstairs, Kristie was able to essay free her hands, and she tried to paper outline plans scoot across the democratic republic, floor and hide beneath the basement steps. Research Paper Outline. Powell returned to job objective resume the basement, removed Kristie's eyeglasses, and strangled her until she was unconscious. Powell stabbed Kristie in the stomach, and the knife stopped within a centimeter of her aorta. He slashed her in her neck numerous times, and the repair of the knife wounds required 61 sutures. Research. She had multiple stab wounds to her neck and abdomen. She also had wounds on her wrists. Robert Culver arrived at the home at 4:15 p.m. on January 29, 1999. He could not locate Kristie or Stacey. He went to the girls' bedrooms and saw that Stacey's room was in disarray.

He entered Kristie's room, turned on the lights, and case study essays found Stacey's body on the floor. He observed blood on her body and saw that she was not breathing. When Culver went to the basement in search of a telephone, he discovered Kristie lying naked and bound on paper, the floor, bleeding from her neck and friend essay for class stomach. He saw that she had been stabbed in research paper plans, the stomach and her throat was slit pretty severely, many times. Culver found a telephone, dialed 911, and spoke to emergency response personnel. In a recent interview, Robert Culver said the worst part for him are the regrets of that day.

He says he had a cold and job objective resume that his boss told him he could leave early on that day. He almost took him up on the offer, but didn't want the girls to think he came home early because he didn't trust them to research paper outline plans be alone. Little things like that, he said. I should have been home. Although Kristie was experiencing life-threatening injuries, she was able to tell police officers and coke paramedics that Paul Powell was her assailant. Stacey's death was caused by a stab wound to research paper outline her chest. The wound pattern indicated that the anne bradstreet dear and loving essay, blade of the knife pierced her heart and was twisted upon withdrawal.

The blade of Powell's knife was consistent with the stab wounds. There were numerous bruises on Stacey's head, neck, chest, abdomen, back, arms, and legs. She suffered stab wounds in her back and arm. She also had abrasions on research paper plans, her left hand and wrist that were characterized as defensive wounds. Essay. Stacey's body contained bruises on her lower neck that were consistent with someone stepping or stomping on paper plans, her face and neck. Police officers arrested Powell on January 30, 1999 at the home of a friend.

The police officers also located a blue sports bag that belonged to Powell. A nine-millimeter semiautomatic pistol with a full magazine containing 10 Winchester nine- millimeter cartridges was in the bag. The bag also contained a survival knife with a five and one-half inch blade inside a black sheath and how to write a tma a butterfly knife with a five inch blade. The survival knife sheath contained a dark reddish-brown stain. The DNA profile obtained from the stain on the sheath was consistent with the DNA profile of Stacey Reed and different from the DNA profile of Kristie Reed and Paul Powell. The probability of selecting an unrelated individual with a matching DNA profile is approximately one in 1.1 billion in the Caucasian population. After his arrest, Powell consented to several interviews with police officers. Paper. During one interview, he stated that he had been at the Reeds' home on job objective, January 29, 1999 and that Stacey was dead because she was stupid. Powell told the police officers that he and outline plans Stacey had an my best 8 argument because she had a black boyfriend, and Powell didn't agree with interracial dating. Powell claimed that during the argument, Stacey attacked him and scratched his face, and then he pushed her to research plans the floor.

He claimed that Stacey attacked him again, and that she got stuck on coke, his knife. Powell also initially denied raping Kristie. In a second statement to police officers, Powell admitted that he raped Kristie. Research Plans. The detective who interviewed Powell testified that Powell stated that he had to kill Kristie because she was the only witness and he would have to go to jail. Powell was sentenced to death in August, 2000. In 2001, the Virginia Supreme Court overturned his death sentence, saying that prosecutors had failed to prove that Powell had raped Stacey which was part of the resume, reason for defining the case as a capital murder. A murder that is committed in conjunction with another felony is one of the requirements for a death sentence and the appeals court felt that the rape of research paper, Stacey's sister Kristie was a separate act. Under the erroneous assumption that this meant he could no longer face the death penalty, Powell wrote two letters to the Commonwealth's Attorney of Prince William County, Paul Ebert.

Below is the anne and loving husband, content of a letter that Powell wrote, dated October 21, 2001. Mr. Research Outline Plans. Ebert, Since I have already been indicted on first degree murder and case study essays the Va. Supreme Court said that I can't be charged with capital murder again, I figured I would tell you the rest of paper outline plans, what happened on Jan. 29, 1999, to show you how stupid all of y'all mother f*ckers are. Essay. Y'all should have known that there is more to research the story than what I told by what I said. You had it in writing that I planned to kill the whole family. Job Objective. Since I planned to paper kill the whole family, why would I have fought with Stacie before killing her? She had no idea I was planning to kill everybody and talked and carried on like usual, so I could've stabbed her up at any time because she was unsuspecting. Anne To My Dear Husband Essay. I had other plans for her before she died.

You know I came back to the house after Bobby's lunch break was over research outline, and he had went back to work. When I got back, she was on the phone so I went inside and I laid down on the couch. How To. When the cab came to bring me my pager, I ran out of the house and she jumped and got off the phone and came off the porch to see why I ran out of the house like I did. When the cab left we went in research, the house. I laid on the couch again and she went to her room and got her clothes and went downstairs to do her laundry. When she went downstairs, I got up and shut and locked the back door and vs pepsi case went downstairs. We talked while she put her clothes in the wash. Research. We continued talking when she had everything in the wash and I reached over and touched her ti+ and asked if she wanted to f*ck. She said no, because she had a boyfriend. I started arguing with her because she had never turned anybody down because of having a boyfriend. Write A Tma. We started walking upstairs, arguing the whole time.

When we got upstairs we went to research paper plans her room and she turned the radio off. After she turned the radio off I pushed her onto resume her bed and grabbed her wrists and pinned her hands down by her head and sat on top of her. I told her that all I wanted to do was f*ck her and then I would leave and research paper plans that we could do it the easy way or the hard way. Anne Bradstreet Husband. She said she would f*ck me so I got up. After I got up, she got up and started fighting with me and clawed me face.

We wrestled around a little and then I slammed her to the floor. When she hit the floor I sat on top of her and pinned her hands down again. She said she would f*ck me and I told her that if she tried fighting with me again, I would kill her. When I got up she stood up and kept asking me why I was doing this and all I kept saying is take your clothes off. Finally she undid her pants and pulled them down to her ankles. She was getting ready to take them the rest of the way off and the phone rang. When she heard the phone she pulled her pants back up and said she had to answer the phone. I pushed her back and said no. Research Paper Outline. She said that she wouldn't say anything about coke vs pepsi case study me being there and I told her no and to take her clothes off. She tried to get out of the room again and I pushed her back and pulled out my knife.

I guess she thought I was just trying to research plans scare her and that I wouldn't really stab her because she tried to leave again. When she got to me and tried to squeeze between me and the door jam I stabbed her. When I stabbed her, she fell back against job objective resume, the door jam and research paper outline just looked at job objective resume, me with a shocked look on research outline plans, her face. When I pulled the knife out she stumbled a couple steps and fell in her sister's room. I walked over bradstreet essay, and looked at her. Research Outline Plans. I saw that she was still breathing so I stepped over her body and into paper the bedroom. Then I put my foot on her throat and paper outline stepped up so she couldn't breathe. Then I stepped down and coke vs pepsi study essays started stomping on her throat. Then I stepped back onto her throat and plans moved up and down putting more pressure to make it harder to breathe.

When I didn't see her breathing anymore, I left the anne and loving husband essay, room and got some iced tea and sat on the couch and research paper outline smoked a cigarette. You know the rest of job objective resume, what happened after that point. I would like to research outline thank you for saving my life. I know you're probably wondering how you saved my life, so I'll tell you. You saved my life by f*cking up. There were 2 main f*ck-ups you made that saved me. The first was the way you worded my capital murder indictment.

The second was the comment you made in coke vs pepsi essays, your closing argument when you said we won't know because he won't tell us. One more time, thank you! Now y'all know everything that happened in that house at 8023 McLean St. on Jan. 29, 1999. I guess I forgot to mention these events when I was being questioned. Ha Ha! Sike! I knew what y'all would be able to prove in court, so I told you what you already knew. Stacey was dead and no one else was in paper outline, the house so I knew ya'll would never know everything she went through unless she came back to life. Since the Supreme Court said I can't be charged with capital murder again, I can tell you what I just told you because I no longer have to worry about the death penalty.

And y'all are supposed to be so goddamn smart. I can't believe that y'all thought I told you everything. Well, it's too late now. Speed Research. Nothing you can do about it now so f*ck you you fat, c*cksucking, c*m guzzling, gutter slu+. I guess I'll see your bi+ch a$$ on Dec. Research Paper. 18 at trial because I'm not pleading to shi+.

Tell the how to, family to be ready to testify and relive it all again because if I have to suffer for the next 50 or 60 years or however long then they can suffer the torment of reliving what happened for a couple of days. I'm gone. Paper. F*ck you and anyone like you or that associates with people like you. Job Objective Resume. I almost forgot, f*ck your god, too. Jesus knows how to suck a d*ck real good.

Did you teach him? Well, die a slow, painful, miserable death. See ya punk. Do you just hate yourself for being so stupid and for f*ckin' up and saving me? Sincerely, Paul Powell. In a statement to outline plans a police officer on November 2, 2001, Powell gave the following description of Stacey's murder: She walked over to and uh I pushed her back. And then she walked over to anne bradstreet to my dear husband me again I think and then I pulled my knife out and research paper outline plans you know, and she looked at me you know. Case Study. I guess she thought I wouldn't stab her or whatever. So she tried to leave and go to answer the phone. That's that. . . . . After she got stabbed, she just looked at me for a minute you know and then you know, she . . .she was surprised and them um, I pulled the knife out, you know she stumbled a few steps, fell down in research plans, Christy's doorway.

I just walked over and looked at her. And I stepped over top of bradstreet dear husband essay, her and stepped on her throat and then stood on her throat and then stomped on her throat . Research Paper. . . My Best 8. then I stood on research, her throat until I didn't see her breathing no more. . . . .What I'm saying I was stepping on her. I'm saying I put all my weight on her. I'm saying that I put my foot there you know and then I lifted myself up to where I was standing on top of my best friend 8, her. Research Outline Plans. Started stomping on her throat.

And then man, I just stood on her throat again until I didn't see her breathe no more. Resume. Before he raped Kristie, Powell knew that he intended to kill her. In response to a police officer's question: Before you raped Kristie, you knew you were going to kill her; didn't you?, Powell responded: I really didn't have a choice; did I? While incarcerated in jail awaiting his capital murder trial, Powell sent a letter to Lorraine Reed, the mother of Stacey and Kristie. Paper. Powell enclosed a photograph of a partially nude woman. Research. Powell wrote: Lorraine, I was wondering if you might be able to help me think of something. I found this picture in research, a magazine and it kinda looks like someone I know or used to know, but I can't think of the persons name.

I think you know the person too, so I was wondering if you could tell me the name of the person this picture resembles so I can quit racking my brain trying to think of it? I would appreciate it. If you don't know the person I'm talking about, ask Kristie or Kelly Welch because I know they know who I'm thinking of. If you talk to the person I'm talking about, please give her my address and tell her to write me. The partially nude woman shown in the photograph resembled Lorraine Reed's daughter, Stacey. Powell wrote a letter to a friend while he was incarcerated. He stated: About when you asked me why I wouldn't do to you what I did to Stacie, I couldn't ever hurt you because you mean to much to me. See Stacie didn't mean anything to me.

She was a ni**er lover and some of her wannabe skin head friends were supposed to kill me. Write. That's part of the reason why she died. Almost everything that happened in that house was planned. The only research paper outline thing that wasn't planned was trying to f*ck Kristie. What was supposed to happen was, Stacie was supposed to die, and did, Kristie was supposed to die and then I was going to wait for their mom and stepdad to get home and I was going to kill them and then I was going to how to take their moms truck and then I was gonna go to North Carolina and knock this dude off that stole all of my clothes and everything else I owned.

I had been thinking about doing it for along time but I could never bring myself to do it. I don't know what happened to make me finally do it. Paper Outline Plans. I feel bad for speed research paper doing it. Stacie was a good kid. Powell wrote, in research plans, another letter: Hey babe, what's happening? Not too much here.

I writing you to see if you could get one of your guy friends to do me a favor. You know that Kristie is telling the cops things and that she is dear essay going to testify against me in court. I was wondering if you could get somebody to research paper go to a pay phone and call Kristie and tell her she better tell the cops that she lied to them and tell her she better not testify against me or she's gonna die. Powell sent the following letter to the Commonwealth's Attorney of Prince William County: Fat Ebert, What's up you fat head f*cker? I'm just writing to tell you, since you want to my best 8 kill me so Goddamn bad for killing your ni**er loving whore, set up a court date closer than Oct. 25 so I can go ahead and get this bullshi+ over with and plead guilty so you can kill me and get it over with, unless you want to paper plans let me out so I can kill the research paper, rest of the ni**er lovers and all the ni**ers, Jews, Sp*cs and everybody else in this f*cked up country that's not white. That includes you because you are a ni**er loving Jewish f*cking fa**ot. I will see you in hell bi+ch. your buddy, Paul Powell - P.S.

Watch your back! The jury viewed writings and drawings taken from Powell's jail cell that demonstrated his hatred of research plans, people who were not Caucasian. Additionally, the jury heard evidence that Powell told police officers that he was a racist and described his violent racial views. He stated, everybody that ain't white shouldn't – he needs to die. Powell had told a police officer that he wanted to purchase a gun to speed research kill somebody. Outline. Kill a lot of somebodies . . . Paper. just for something to research do. The jury was aware of job objective resume, Powell's criminal record, including three convictions for research paper outline contributing to the delinquency of a minor, two larceny convictions, and three felony convictions for abduction, rape, and attempted capital murder of Kristie.

In supporting the jury's finding that Powell's conduct was outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible or inhuman in that it involved . . . depravity of mind and. . . aggravated battery to the victim beyond the minimum necessary to speed research accomplish the act of murder, the criminal appeals court in Virginia commented, The day before Powell committed these gruesome crimes, he went to the victims' home and surveyed the interior of the research outline plans, house. He returned the next day and tried to rape Stacey, who struggled with him. He stabbed her in the heart, twisted the speed paper, knife, and reinserted the knife in her heart. Paper Outline. He stomped upon her throat and he placed the entire weight of his body on congo essay, her throat until she died. Plans. Next, he drank a glass of iced tea, smoked a cigarette, and waited for Stacey's younger 14-year-old sister to bradstreet dear essay return home.

When Kristie arrived, Powell directed her to her sister's body, forced her downstairs into the basement, and raped her on the floor. He then tied her hands and feet while she was naked, choked her until she was unconscious, stabbed her in the stomach, and slashed her neck numerous times in an attempt to kill her. After the vicious attacks, Powell had snuck out the back door, leaving Kristie for dead. He drove with a friend to Washington and bought some drugs, then returned to the friend's girlfriend's house where he drank beer and ordered a pizza. They were still waiting for plans it to be delivered when police knocked on the door. Powell did not know his younger victim had survived and identified her attacker. Paul Warner Powell. Date of Birth: April 13, 1978. Entered the Row: September 15, 2000. District: Prince William County. Conviction: Capital murder.

Virginia DOC Inmate Number: 285713. On May 5, 2000, a jury in the Circuit Court of Prince William County convicted Paul Warner Powell of resume, capital murder, attempted capital murder, abduction, rape, and research paper outline grand larceny. Powell was 20-years old when he committed the my best, crimes. On January 29, 1999, Powell entered the home of Stacie Reed, a 16-year old acquaintance. Powell was angry because she was dating a black youth and confronted her. After a scuffle, Powell stabbed Reed three times with a survival knife, twice in the heart. Powell remained at the residence until Reed’s 14-year old sister arrived home. Powell then raped her, slit her throat, stabbed her in the abdomen and left her for dead. Reed’s sister survived and later testified against Powell.

The jury recommended the death penalty and three life sentences for the convictions. Powell refused to allow his defense to paper outline plans present mitigation evidence during the coke essays, trial’s penalty phase. Prince William Circuit Judge Herman Whisenant upheld the jury’s recommendation and sentenced Powell to die. Whisenant rejected a defense motion to overrule the paper outline, jury because the sentence had not been unanimous. The jury forewoman, Jennifer Melanie Day, testified that had she known life in prison was an option, she would have never voted for a death sentence. In 2001, the Virginia Supreme Court reversed Powell’s death sentence, saying that prosecutors had failed to prove that Powell had raped Reed, part of the speed research paper, reason for defining the murder as a capital case. In October of 2001, Powell wrote letters to Prince William County Commonwealth Attorney Paul Ebert and research paper outline the victim’s family detailing his crimes. The letters served as new evidence, even if the underlying crime was the same. My Best Friend Essay. Powell was retried in 2003 that Powell be sentenced to death.

The sentence was upheld by the Virginia Supreme Court in January 2004. Powell has been on death row since September 15, 2000. Powell v. Commonwealth , 552 S.E.2d 344 (Va. Research Paper. 2001) (Direct Appeal-Reversed). Defendant was convicted in the Circuit Court, Prince William County, Herman A. Whisenant Jr., J., of capital murder and related offenses and was sentenced to death. He appealed. The Supreme Court, Lawrence L. Koontz, Jr., J., held that: (1) it was reversible error to allow pretrial amendment of indictment to charge two new gradation crimes that were not considered by write a tma the grand jury; (2) error was harmless, at guilt phase, in prosecutor's commenting on defendant's failure to testify; (3) evidence was insufficient to support conviction; and (4) sentencing verdict form should have allowed the jury the option to impose a sentence of life imprisonment and a fine of up to $100,000.

Affirmed in research paper, part, reversed in part, and remanded. G. Sufficiency of the how to a tma, Evidence. Powell assigns error to the trial court's failure to outline strike the speed research paper, evidence as to paper outline plans the abduction of Kristie on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to research support a jury finding that the restraint used exceeded that necessary to accomplish the crime of rape. We disagree. A defendant may be convicted of abduction in addition to “another crime involving restraint of the victim, both growing out of a continuing course of conduct, . only when the detention committed in the act of abduction is separate and apart from, and not merely incidental to, the restraint employed in the commission of the other crime.” Brown v. Commonwealth, 230 Va. 310, 314, 337 S.E.2d 711, 713-14 (1985). Here, there is sufficient evidence to support the finding of the jury that Powell used greater restraint than was necessary to commit rape.FN11 First, Powell ordered Kristie to research go to a more secluded part of the home prior to the rape. See, e.g., Wilson v. Commonwealth, 249 Va. 95, 103, 452 S.E.2d 669, 675, cert. denied, 516 U.S. My Best Friend For Class. 841, 116 S.Ct. 127, 133 L.Ed.2d 76 (1995).

Although Powell did not display a weapon to her at that time, it is clear under the paper outline plans, circumstances that Kristie was in reasonable fear for her life having just discovered her sister's lifeless body and being aware that Powell was usually armed. Moreover, after the bradstreet husband, rape was complete, Powell bound Kristie and left her for some time before returning to outline plans attempt to vs pepsi case essays kill her. This restraint clearly exceeded that necessary to accomplish the rape. See Hoke v. Commonwealth, 237 Va. Research Plans. 303, 311, 377 S.E.2d 595, 600, cert. denied, 491 U.S. 910, 109 S.Ct. 3201, 105 L.Ed.2d 709 (1989). Accordingly, we hold that the how to, trial court did not err in research paper outline plans, failing to strike the evidence as to the charge of abduction. Within the same assignment of error, Powell also asserts that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for the capital murder of Stacey “during the commission of or subsequent to” the rape of Kristie.

There is simply no evidence upon which the jury could have found that Powell committed the rape of Kristie before or during the murder of to my dear and loving husband, Stacey. Indeed, it is undisputed that the plans, rape occurred after the murder was completed. Accordingly, the republic congo, evidence was insufficient to support Powell's conviction for capital murder as charged in the amended indictment. FN12. For the reasons previously stated in this opinion, Powell's conviction for that crime will be reversed, and he will not be subject to retrial for paper that offense. Accordingly, we need not address the error assigned to the trial court's failure to resume poll the research, jury with respect to whether the rape occurred before, during, or after the murder.

Having already determined that Powell's conviction for capital murder will be reversed, we now further determine that there is no basis upon which Powell can be retried for capital murder on remand. The poll of the friend for class 8, jury establishes that Powell was acquitted of the charge of capital murder in the commission of robbery or attempted robbery. Paper. It is equally clear that there is simply no evidence upon which the anne dear essay, jury could have relied to find that Powell committed or attempted to commit any sexual assault against Stacey before or during her murder, or that the rape of Kristie did not occur after the murder of her sister. Accordingly, under the circumstances of this case, the evidence at research plans, best would have supported a conviction for how to write first degree murder. For these reasons, we will reverse Powell's conviction for capital murder, affirm his convictions for abduction, rape, attempted capital murder, and grand larceny, and remand the case for a new trial on a charge of no greater than first degree murder for the killing of paper, Stacey Reed, if the Commonwealth be so advised. Powell v. Commonwealth , 590 S.E.2d 537 (Va. 2004) (Direct Appeal). Background: Defendant was convicted in essay, the Circuit Court, Prince William County, Herman A. Whisenant Jr., J., of capital murder and related offenses and was sentenced to paper outline plans death. He appealed. The Supreme Court, 261 Va.

512, 552 S.E.2d 344, affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. On remand, defendant was convicted in the Circuit Court, Prince William County, Herman A. Republic. Whisenant Jr., J., of research paper plans, capital murder in the commission or attempted commission of bradstreet and loving husband essay, sexual assault. Defendant appealed. On consolidation of the research paper outline, automatic review of defendant's death sentence with his appeal, Holdings: the Supreme Court, Lawrence L. How To. Koontz, Jr., J., held that: (1) fact that Commonwealth's attorney had read defendant's correspondence, stating “how stupid all y'all are,” was insufficient to disqualify attorney from prosecuting defendant's second murder trial; (2) neither law of the case doctrine nor double jeopardy barred retrying defendant for capital murder; (3) probative value of evidence that defendant raped and attempted to murder victim's sister was not outweighed by its prejudicial effect; (4) evidence sufficiently corroborated defendant's letter confessing to outline plans having attempted to rape the my best essay, murder victim; and (5) defendant's death sentence was not excessive nor disproportionate to similar cases. Affirmed. OPINION BY Justice LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR.

In this appeal, we review the capital murder conviction and sentence of death imposed upon Paul Warner Powell for research paper the murder of Stacey Lynn Reed in the commission of, or subsequent to, attempted rape. Code § 18.2-31(5). A. Speed Research Paper. Powell's First Trial and Appeal. Powell was originally convicted of the capital murder of research, Stacey Lynn Reed in 2000 and sentenced to death. See Powell v. Job Objective. Commonwealth, 261 Va. 512, 530, 552 S.E.2d 344, 354 (2001). In the outline, same trial, Powell was convicted of the abduction, rape, and attempted capital murder of research, Stacey's younger sister, Kristie Erin Reed, and was sentenced to three terms of life imprisonment and fines totaling $200,000 for those crimes. FN1 The abduction, rape, and attempted capital murder convictions, as well as a conviction for grand larceny, were affirmed in the prior appeal and are not at issue in outline, this appeal. Powell had also been tried for robbery and attempted robbery, Code § 18.2-58, and three counts of use of bradstreet to my dear and loving, a firearm, Code § 18.2-53.1.

He was acquitted of those crimes. Upon review of the capital murder conviction and the death sentence imposed upon Powell, this Court reversed the conviction on various grounds including a finding that the indictment charging Powell with capital murder in the commission of robbery and/or attempted robbery had been improperly amended to include a charge of capital murder “during the commission of or subsequent to rape and/or attempted rape and/or sodomy and/or attempted sodomy.” FN2 Id. at 532, 552 S.E.2d at 355-56. Upon review of the record, we further held that the wording of the research plans, indictment limited the Commonwealth to proving that the “gradation crime was a rape occurring before or during the killing,” id. at 538-39, 552 S.E.2d at 359, and there was “no evidence upon republic essay, which the jury could have found that Powell committed the rape of Kristie before or during the murder of Stacey.” Id. at 541, 535 S.E.2d at outline plans, 361. FN2. Following the presentation of the Commonwealth's case-in-chief in Powell's first trial, the Commonwealth had conceded that there was no evidence of forcible sodomy or attempted forcible sodomy against Kristie.

Powell, 261 Va. at 525, 552 S.E.2d at coke vs pepsi case essays, 351. Thus, that aspect of the amended indictment for capital murder from Powell's first trial is not relevant to any issue raised in this appeal. We summarized the consequence of research paper outline plans, these holdings in the conclusion of the opinion, stating: there is simply no evidence upon which the jury could have relied to find that Powell committed or attempted to commit any sexual assault against Stacey before or during her murder, or that the rape of speed research paper, Kristie did not occur after the murder of her sister. Outline. Accordingly, under the circumstances of this case, the write a tma, evidence at best would have supported a conviction for research outline first degree murder. For these reasons, we will reverse Powell's conviction for capital murder . and how to write a tma remand the case for a new trial on paper plans, a charge of no greater than first degree murder for research the killing of Stacey Reed, if the Commonwealth be so advised. Id. at research outline plans, 545-46, 552 S.E.2d at 363.

The mandate from this Court to the trial court tracked the language of the coke vs pepsi case study, opinion, and directed that “the case is remanded . for a new trial on a charge of research outline, no greater than first degree murder for the killing of Stacey Reed, if the Commonwealth be so advised.” B. Events and Proceedings Following Remand. On October 21, 2001, Powell wrote an obscenity-laced letter to the Commonwealth's Attorney who had prosecuted Powell in bradstreet to my dear husband essay, his first trial. FN3 Powell stated in the letter that, because he believed he could not be retried for capital murder, “I figured I would tell you the rest of what happened on Jan. Outline Plans. 29, 1999, to show you how stupid all y'all . are.” Admitting that he “planned to kill the whole family” on that day, Powell further stated that “I had other plans for [Stacey] before she died.” Powell described how he had attempted to initiate consensual sexual intercourse with Stacey, which he had previously admitted.

Powell then revealed that when Stacey resisted his advances, he pushed her onto her bed and, while sitting on vs pepsi case study essays, top of her, told Stacey “that we could do it the easy way or the hard way.” FN3. Powell had previously written to the Commonwealth's Attorney on July 4, 2001, proposing a plea agreement for a first degree murder charge for the killing of Stacey Reed. Powell then described how Stacey had “started fighting with me and clawed me [sic] face.” Powell stated that he “slammed her to the floor . sat on top of her and pinned her hands down again.” Powell claimed that Stacey relented “and I told her if she tried fighting with me again I would kill her.” Continuing, Powell stated that, at his direction, Stacey began to plans disrobe, but stopped when the telephone rang. Stacey put her clothes back on anne bradstreet to my dear and loving husband, so that she could answer the telephone. Powell refused to allow Stacey to answer the telephone and ordered her to resume disrobing. When she refused, Powell “pushed her back and pulled out [his] knife.” When Stacey attempted to leave the bedroom, Powell stabbed her. Stacey fell back and Powell removed the knife.

Stacey then stumbled to another bedroom and collapsed. Research. Powell “saw that she was still breathing” and “started stomping on her throat” until he “didn't see her breathing anymore.” The New Indictment Armed with this new evidence, the Commonwealth elected to nolle prosequi the indictment in the remanded case, under which it was limited to speed research trying Powell for first degree murder under our mandate, and sought a new indictment against Powell for capital murder. On December 3, 2001, the grand jury returned an indictment charging Powell with the capital murder of “Stacey Lynn Reed during the commission of or subsequent to the attempted rape of Stacey Lynn Reed.” C. Paper Plans. Powell's Second Trial.

Motions to Dismiss the Indictment. On April 24, 2002, Powell filed a motion to dismiss the coke vs pepsi, December 3, 2001 indictment. Powell asserted that “[w]hen the Supreme Court of Virginia issues an research paper outline opinion concerning a case, this opinion becomes the law of the case” and, thus, the directive of the opinion and mandate from this Court in his first appeal limited his retrial to a charge no greater than first degree murder, regardless whether that trial was conducted under the original indictment or a new indictment. The Commonwealth filed a response to this motion, asserting that the judgment of my best for class 8, this Court in Powell's first appeal was not applicable to the December 3, 2001 indictment because Powell had “never [previously] been charged with the capital murder of Stacey Reed in the commission or attempted commission [of] sexual assault against [Stacey Reed] because, at the time of paper, [Powell's first] trial, no such evidence existed.” Accordingly, the Commonwealth contended that the republic essay, December 3, 2001 indictment was “a new charge, one that has never been litigated in trial nor considered by paper the Virginia Supreme Court.” Following a hearing on this and other pre-trial matters, the trial court overruled Powell's motion to dismiss the friend for class 8, indictment in an order dated May 6, 2002. On May 17, 2002, Powell filed a second motion to paper dismiss the December 3, 2001 indictment. The briefs filed in the trial court in democratic republic congo, support of and in opposition to this motion parallel the arguments made on appeal with respect to this issue and, accordingly, we will only research summarize the essential points of those arguments here. Anne Bradstreet To My And Loving. The import of Powell's argument was that his prior trial and paper outline the reversal of his conviction by vs pepsi case this Court acted as an “implied” or “judicial” acquittal of the attempted rape of Stacey, thus barring his retrial for her capital murder premised on research paper outline plans, that gradation offense. How To Write A Tma. The Commonwealth responded that the issue whether Stacey had been the victim of a sexual assault was not before the paper, jury in democratic republic, his first trial because the bill of particulars provided at Powell's request indicated that only paper plans Kristie was the victim of the for class 8, sexual assault gradation offenses charged in research outline, the amended indictment. Similarly, the Commonwealth contended that our comments concerning the write, insufficiency of the evidence to prove a sexual assault or attempted sexual assault against outline, Stacey were not directed toward any finding of the jury, but to the contrary were indicative of the job objective resume, fact that the research paper outline, jury did not consider whether Stacey had been the victim of such an assault or attempt.

On June 5, 2002, the trial court held a hearing on Powell's second motion to dismiss the indictment. After hearing argument, the job objective, trial court stated that by identifying Kristie as the victim of the rape or attempted rape in the bill of particulars, the Commonwealth had clearly identified her as the victim of those gradation crimes in the amended indictment for capital murder. The trial court also agreed with the Commonwealth that this Court's reference to the lack of evidence to plans prove any sexual assault or attempted sexual assault against Stacey was merely a comment on the record, and not an assertion that this was a theory of the case presented by the Commonwealth in Powell's first trial. On July 3, 2002, the trial court entered an order overruling Powell's second motion to dismiss the job objective, indictment. Other Pre-trial Motions. On April 25, 2002, Powell filed a motion to have Virginia's statutory scheme for charging a capital crime and paper imposing a death sentence declared unconstitutional on various grounds. On appeal, Powell reasserts only some of to my dear and loving husband, these arguments and does so only in summary fashion.

Accordingly, we will not summarize those arguments in detail here, but will address them within the discussion of the relevant assignment of error, infra. On April 26, 2002, Powell filed a motion seeking to have the Commonwealth's Attorney's office disqualified from prosecuting his case. Powell contended that the Commonwealth's Attorney had a conflict of interest because he was a key “chain of custody witness” with respect to his receipt of Powell's October 21, 2001 letter “confession” to the attempted rape of Stacey. Powell further contended that the offensive nature of research plans, that letter and his other conduct toward the Commonwealth's Attorney had created such a level of animosity that the speed research paper, Commonwealth's Attorney would not be able to research outline objectively pursue justice, but would instead seek to satisfy a personal vendetta against Powell. Powell further contended that this taint of bias extended to every attorney in the Commonwealth's Attorney's office, and further asserted that these attorneys would be potential witnesses called to give testimony concerning the Commonwealth's Attorney's personal animus against how to a tma, Powell.FN4. FN4. Powell further contended that one of the Assistant Commonwealth's Attorneys while in research outline, private practice had represented Powell in an unrelated criminal matter and, thus, had a conflict of interest. Vs Pepsi Study Essays. Powell does not reassert this issue on appeal. On May 1, 2002, the Commonwealth filed responses to Powell's motions to plans have Virginia's statutory scheme for charging a capital crime and imposing a death sentence declared unconstitutional and to disqualify the Commonwealth's Attorney's office. With respect to the former, the Commonwealth asserted that all the issues raised therein had previously been considered and rejected by this Court, and there was no cause for the trial court to revisit them. As to the latter, the how to write, Commonwealth asserted that there was no evidence of bias on the part of the Commonwealth's Attorney or other members of research, his office and democratic republic congo denied that there was any such bias, that the manner of research outline, establishing the chain of custody of Powell's letter was not the defense's concern, and that the questions of an appearance of impropriety should be raised through a disciplinary complaint proceeding.

On May 6, 2002, in the same hearing in which the trial court heard argument of Powell's first motion to republic dismiss the indictment, the trial court also heard argument on paper outline plans, Powell's motions to have Virginia's statutory scheme for charging a capital crime and imposing a death sentence declared unconstitutional and to disqualify the Commonwealth's Attorney's office from how to write a tma prosecuting the case. Following that hearing, the trial court entered an order overruling these motions without comment. On December 11, 2002, Powell filed a motion to exclude any evidence concerning his abduction, rape, and attempted murder of Kristie Reed from his trial. Powell contended that because he was charged only with the capital murder of research paper outline plans, Stacey Reed predicated on an attempted rape of her, evidence of his subsequent attack on Kristie was irrelevant or that any probative value it might have would be overborne by its unduly prejudicial effect on the jury. Speed. The Commonwealth did not file a response to this motion, but during oral argument in research paper outline plans, a hearing held December 23, 2002, the bradstreet to my dear and loving, Commonwealth asserted that evidence concerning the attack on Kristie was part of a continuing criminal enterprise and was relevant to show Powell's motive and intent in attempting the rape of Stacey. Also on December 11, 2002, Powell, alleging that the United States Supreme Court's decision in Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584, 122 S.Ct. 2428, 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002) had called into question prior judgments of this Court concerning the issue, filed a motion seeking to have Code § 19.2-264.4(B) declared unconstitutional because it permits a jury to consider evidence relating to the future dangerousness and vileness aggravating factors without full protection of due process to the defendant to confront witnesses. Powell also asserted that the statutory definitions of the aggravating factors are vague and, thus, would likely result in “unreliable” jury verdicts.

The Commonwealth filed a brief in response to this motion, asserting that the issue of the constitutionality of Code § 19.2-264.4(B) is research plans settled law. On December 16, 2002, Powell filed a motion to how to write suppress various statements he made to paper police during the initial investigation of the crimes. Powell alleged that after giving an initial statement following waiver of his Miranda rights, he advised police that he had nothing more to say. Thereafter, Powell contended, any statement he made to job objective resume police without a readvisement and waiver of his Miranda rights should be suppressed. The Commonwealth responded that the suppression issue had been decided in paper outline plans, Powell's first trial and, thus, the doctrine of res judicata barred consideration of the issue in his second trial.

FN5 Powell filed a supplemental motion on to my and loving essay, December 17, 2002 asserting that a statement taken by an investigator on November 2, 2001, while Powell was in paper outline, prison following his first trial, should be suppressed because his counsel was not present. The Commonwealth responded that Powell had been advised of and coke essays waived his Miranda rights prior to research paper plans giving this statement and that he was not entitled to counsel under the Sixth Amendment at that time because he had not yet been indicted for the offense for which he was then on trial, and speed research paper the formal proceedings on the prior indictments had concluded. FN5. Powell did not contest the trial court's failure to research paper suppress his statements in the appeal of anne bradstreet and loving husband essay, his first conviction. In summarizing its rulings on these motions during the December 23, 2002 hearing, the research paper outline, trial court stated that it found Powell had waived his Miranda rights with respect to the statement made after his first trial but prior to how to the bringing of the second indictment and, thus, the statement was not barred by either the Fifth or Sixth Amendments. The trial court also indicated that it would deny the motion to suppress the statements from the initial investigation of the outline plans, crimes, incorporating by reference the finding made during the first trial with respect to those statements. The trial court further found that evidence of Powell's attack on Kristie was admissible as being part of democratic congo essay, a common scheme and to show consciousness of guilt. The trial court entered an omnibus order denying all these motions as well as the motion challenging the constitutionality of Code § 19.2-264.4(B). Powell's second trial commenced on research paper outline plans, January 13, 2003. The trial court conducted voir dire of the venire in panels of five potential jurors. Job Objective. In questioning the first panel, the trial court inquired whether “any of you have acquired any information about the alleged offense, or of the accused from the news media, or other sources in this particular matter?” The five panel members indicated that they had not.

The Commonwealth further inquired whether “[i]f during the course of trial you should hear something which would jog your memory about the publicity, would you be able to set that aside and render your verdict based solely on research outline plans, what you hear in the courtroom?” The five panel members each indicated that they could do so. During his voir dire of the first panel, Powell's counsel attempted to ask the following question: You're going to hear in this case that the Defendant has already been tried and convicted of capital murder at one point, and he's serving life sentences for other crimes. Republic Essay. You're also going to hear that the Supreme Court of Virginia overturned the- At this point, the Commonwealth objected and during a bench conference, referencing Barker v. Commonwealth, 230 Va. 370, 375, 337 S.E.2d 729, 733 (1985), asserted that, as the panel had already indicated that they had not heard of the case previously, Powell's counsel's question concerning the prior trial and appeal “may, in fact, taint” the members of the panel and research paper disqualify them from serving on the jury. Powell's counsel responded that because the evidence would disclose the fact of his prior convictions and the reversal of bradstreet to my essay, his capital murder conviction and death sentence on appeal, the prohibition of Barker did not apply. He further contended that because a jury's knowledge of research, a prior conviction was potentially prejudicial to the defendant, it was a “tactical decision that we've made . and speed research we wish this evidence to come forward.” Thus, he contended that it was proper to explore the potential jurors' bias that would result from research paper outline plans hearing that evidence. The trial court ruled, even though it agreed that this was a “unique case” because the evidence would establish the fact of the prior conviction and appellate reversal, “the Barker case is still good law.” Accordingly, the trial court concluded that “we have to start off with a jury that does not have” knowledge of the vs pepsi case, prior trial, conviction, and appeal. Accordingly, the trial court ruled that Powell could not question the paper outline, jurors about their potential bias based upon such evidence being likely to be presented during the trial. The Commonwealth then inquired, “Are we going to strike this panel or will the Court instruct the panel to disregard the question?” When the trial court indicated that it would instruct the panel to disregard the question, Powell's counsel objected that he was “not sure that instructing them is speed paper sufficient . Paper. if they've already been told-.” The trial court cut off the objection, stating that the members of the panel had already indicated they were unaware of the case and that “all I can do is tell them to disregard the question.”

Guilt-Determination Phase Apart from the new evidence of Powell's October 21, 2001 letter to my best for class the Commonwealth's Attorney in which Powell confessed to the attempted rape of Stacey, the evidence presented during the research paper outline plans, guilt-determination phase of Powell's second trial was not markedly different from job objective that received during the first trial. Because we have thoroughly recounted that evidence in reviewing his first trial, see Powell, 261 Va. at 518-520, 552 S.E.2d at 347-348, and Powell does not challenge the paper, sufficiency of the evidence except with respect to proof of the attempted rape of essay, Stacey, we need not reiterate the full extent of the outline plans, evidence, but will suffice with a summary of the essential details. Powell, who was twenty years old at the time of the crimes, had been acquainted with Stacey and resume her family for approximately two-and-a-half years. Powell, a self-avowed racist and white supremacist, objected to Stacey dating Sean Wilkerson, a black classmate of research plans, Stacey's. Id. at how to write a tma, 518, 552 S.E.2d at 347. Stacey arrived home just before noon on January 29, 1999 to find Powell waiting for her. Research Outline. When Powell learned that Robert Culver, a friend of the girls' mother, would be home shortly for lunch, Powell left, but returned at essay, about 12:45 p.m., after Culver had left. When Powell returned, he was armed with a survival knife, a butterfly knife, a box cutter, and research paper a 9-millimeter pistol.

Id. During the initial investigation, Powell claimed that he and democratic republic congo essay Stacey had argued about her relationship with Wilkerson and in an ensuing struggle, Powell drew the survival knife from his belt and Stacey “got stuck.” Id. Although Powell denied stabbing Stacey deliberately or otherwise injuring her, an autopsy revealed that she had suffered multiple blunt force injuries to her head, neck, and research paper outline plans upper body not consistent with her merely having fallen during a struggle, but consistent with a deliberate stomping. The autopsy also showed that the job objective resume, wound to Stacey's chest was consistent with the knife having been twisted and partially withdrawn and reinserted. Id. at 520, 552 S.E.2d at 348. Powell denied having attempted to sexually assault Stacey, but when questioned again on that point would not give the investigator “a straight answer.” Powell later told police that he “probably” raped Kristie because he “didn't get any with Stacey.” Leaving Stacey for dead, Powell smoked a cigarette and drank a glass of iced tea in the living room of the home, waiting for Kristie to return home from school. When she arrived, Powell met her at the door.

Shortly thereafter, Kristie discovered her sister's body. Paper. Powell then forced her to go to the basement of the home where he brutally raped her and attempted to kill her by strangulation and by cutting her wrists and throat. Id. at 519, 552 S.E.2d at 347. At the conclusion of the Commonwealth's case-in-chief, Powell moved to strike the evidence on the ground that the Commonwealth had not presented sufficient evidence to corroborate Powell's confession in the October 21, 2001 letter that he had attempted to rape Stacey. The Commonwealth pointed to the physical circumstances, such as the disheveled condition of for class, Stacey's bedroom, Stacey's defensive wounds, and paper the fact that when her body was discovered her pants' zipper was slightly undone, as corroborating Powell's confession. The trial court denied the motion to strike. Thereafter, Powell elected not to speed research paper offer any evidence. The jury was instructed, heard closing arguments, and research paper retired to consider its verdict.

After two hours of deliberation, the jury found Powell guilty of capital murder. Powell requested a poll of the democratic republic, jury, which confirmed that the verdict was unanimous. Penalty Determination Phase During the penalty determination phase, the Commonwealth presented evidence of Powell's criminal record, including three convictions for contributing to the delinquency of a minor, two larceny convictions, and his convictions for the abduction, rape, and attempted capital murder of Kristie. The Commonwealth further presented evidence concerning Powell's extreme racist views. Additional evidence showed that Powell had tortured cats when he was younger and that he told an investigator that he wanted to purchase a gun to “ [k]ill somebody. Kill a lot of somebodies. Just for something to do.” Powell also told the research outline plans, investigator that he admired Charles Manson and Adolf Hitler, saying that “[t]hey were cool.” The Commonwealth also presented evidence that Powell wrote an abusive letter to Stacey's mother in which he included a pornographic picture of a woman who resembled Stacey.

Powell presented evidence from his parents and younger brother, a social worker, a psychologist, and a probation officer. This evidence dealt primarily with Powell's upbringing and transfer of custody from his mother to the Department of Youth and Family Services following his juvenile offenses. The psychologist described Powell's home environment as “toxic.” The psychologist further testified that, following his incarceration, Powell had received “[m]edication to help stabilize his mood,” and while medicated Powell “has not had any serious disciplinary infractions.” The psychologist did not offer a specific diagnosis for Powell's “mental-health problems,” but testified that Powell's clinical history suggested an “anti-social personality disorder” and that his behavior as a child suggested Powell had “an under controlled temperament.” The psychologist further testified that the medication Powell had received in the past was “used for manic depressive illness which is now called bi-polar disorder and for certain forms of serious depression.” After ninety minutes of paper, deliberation, the jury returned a unanimous verdict sentencing Powell to death. The jury indicated that the sentence was predicated on both the future dangerousness and vileness aggravating factors. Sentencing On May 8, 2003, the trial court held a sentencing hearing and received a pre-sentence report and research paper plans victim impact evidence from Stacey's mother. Powell's counsel argued that imposition of the death sentence was not appropriate, asserting that so long as Powell were confined and properly medicated, he did not present a continuing danger to vs pepsi case essays society and research paper that a life sentence without possibility of parole was adequate punishment. The Commonwealth responded that Powell had shown no remorse following his conviction in the first trial. The trial court then confirmed the jury's sentence of death. We consolidated the automatic review of Powell's death sentence with his appeal of the capital murder conviction and expedited the appeal on our docket.

Code § 17.1-313(F). Powell raises twelve assignments of error, the first two of which merely restate the republic, elements of the paper, statutory review of any death sentence mandated by Code § 17.1-313(C). We will review Powell's arguments in paper, the order in which the trial court considered the issues below. A. Failure to Dismiss the Capital Murder Indictment In his sixth and research plans seventh assignments of error, Powell contends that the trial court erred in denying his motions to write dismiss the capital murder indictment against him. This was the principal issue addressed by the parties during oral argument before this Court. The various positions under which Powell asserts that he was not subject to trial under the capital murder indictment can be generally summarized as follows: (1) The opinion and mandate of research paper outline, this Court from Powell's first trial limited his retrial for the killing of Stacey Reed to speed research paper a charge no greater than first degree murder on any indictment. (2) Even if retrial on a charge of capital murder was not barred under a new indictment, Powell had been acquitted, either actually or by implication, of the attempted rape of Stacey Reed in his first trial and, thus, the law of the case doctrine barred his being tried for capital murder based upon the attempted rape of Stacey as the gradation offense.

(3) Principles of double jeopardy bar his retrial for a violation of Code § 18.2-31(5) because the indictment in his first trial did not specify the victim of the gradation offense. Effect of Prior Opinion and Mandate. We recognize the principle of the “mandate rule,” stated by the Court of research paper plans, Appeals of Virginia in a different context, that: A trial judge is coke study bound by a decision and mandate from [an appellate court], unless [the court] acted outside [its] jurisdiction. A trial court has no discretion to outline plans disregard [a] lawful mandate. When a case is essays remanded to a trial court from an appellate court, the refusal of the trial court to follow the appellate court mandate constitutes reversible error.

Rowe v. Rowe, 33 Va.App. 250, 257-258, 532 S.E.2d 908, 912 (2000); see also Frank Shop, Inc. Research Paper Outline Plans. v. Crown Central Petroleum Corp., 264 Va. 1, 6, 564 S.E.2d 134, 137 (2002) (holding that “a trial court cannot permit what this Court . [has] said is unlawful” in a mandate reversing the trial court's prior judgment and remanding the case). Relying on this principle, Powell contends that the my best essay, trial court was without authority to retry him on a new indictment charging him with the capital murder of research paper outline plans, Stacey Reed. Powell's reliance, however, is misplaced. It is self-evident that while the opinion of an appellate court, under the doctrine of write, stare decisis, applies to all future cases in the trial courts, the research paper, mandate, which is the research paper, directive of the appellate court certifying a judgment in a particular case to the court from which it was appealed, speaks only to that case.

Moreover, the mandate is controlling only “as to matters within its compass.” Sprague v. Outline. Ticonic National Bank, 307 U.S. 161, 168, 59 S.Ct. 777, 83 L.Ed. 1184 (1939). Thus, while the directive of this Court's mandate binds the circuit court, that court is not thereby prohibited from republic congo essay acting on matters not constrained by the language of the mandate, construed in light of the appellate court's opinion. Research Plans. The mandate rule “is merely a ‘specific application of the law of the case doctrine,’ [and] in the absence of exceptional circumstances, it compels compliance on remand with the dictates of a superior court and forecloses relitigation of issues expressly or impliedly decided by the appellate court.” United States v. Bell, 5 F.3d 64, 66 (4th Cir.1993) (quoting United States v. Bell, 988 F.2d 247, 251 (1st Cir.1993)). Undoubtedly, had the trial court permitted the Commonwealth to anne bradstreet and loving husband retry Powell for capital murder on the original amended indictment invalidated by our decision in reviewing his first conviction, this would have been violative of our mandate and reversible error. Similarly, had the paper plans, Commonwealth dismissed that indictment and sought a new indictment charging Powell with the capital murder of Stacey Reed prior to the rape of Kristie Reed, it would have been error for the trial court to permit that indictment to stand.

However, nothing in our opinion or mandate from Powell's first appeal required the Commonwealth to retry Powell on the original indictment, abridged to cure the defects found by this Court to charge only first-degree murder. To the contrary, the for class, directive of the research paper plans, mandate expressly stated that Powell was to be retried on that indictment based on the record that was before this Court at that time, only “if the Commonwealth be so advised.” Nor did our opinion or mandate expressly preclude the possibility of trying Powell on a new indictment charging capital murder premised on a different gradation offense after dismissal of the former, defective indictment. Vs Pepsi Case. Powell's October 21, 2001 letter to the Commonwealth's Attorney in which he revealed that he had attempted to rape Stacey before he killed her is an exceptional circumstance that merits a narrow application of the research paper, mandate rule. We recognize that, generally, serial prosecutions are not permitted where the how to, Commonwealth deliberately refrains from bringing criminal charges arising out of the research, same act or transaction while prosecuting others in research paper, order to paper outline plans gain the advantage of having multiple trials.

See, e.g., Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 444, 90 S.Ct. 1189, 25 L.Ed.2d 469 (1970). Such was not the dear, case here, however, given the paper outline plans, unexpected and possibly unique circumstance of evidence of an uncharged offense that was not previously known or available coming to light after the conclusion of the first trial in the form of the coke vs pepsi essays, defendant's voluntary confession. Accordingly, we hold that the trial court correctly ruled that the opinion and mandate of this Court from Powell's prior appeal did not bar the research, Commonwealth from dismissing the indictment against him and bringing a new indictment charging him with capital murder premised upon coke vs pepsi study essays, a gradation offense not previously charged by the Commonwealth and based upon evidence that was not previously known or available to research paper the Commonwealth at the time of his first trial. Acquittal under the “Law of the Case” Powell contends that although he was not charged in a separate indictment with the attempted rape of Stacey in his first trial, the Commonwealth nonetheless presented evidence tending to show that he attempted to rape Stacey to bolster its claim that her murder was related to a sexual assault.

To support this claim, Powell relies upon statements made by the Commonwealth's Attorney during his first trial that the evidence would show that Powell “wanted something more from [Stacey] and she wasn't going to give it to him and for that she lost her life.” Powell further notes that during his first trial the Commonwealth had argued against his motion to strike the job objective resume, evidence on capital murder by stating, in part, that “we have evidence . [that Powell] was having sex or attempting to have sex with [Stacey].” Powell contends that as neither the amended indictment for paper outline plans capital murder nor the instructions given to the jury specified the victim of the sexual assault gradation crimes, the Commonwealth intended for the jury in his first trial to consider the possibility that Powell attempted to rape Stacey. Powell notes that because the jury in coke vs pepsi case study, his first trial sent a question to the trial court “seeking clarification whether the rape of Kristie could satisfy the gradation crime requirement for the capital murder of Stacey,” Powell, 261 Va. at 526, 552 S.E.2d at 352, this indicated that the jury had considered and research rejected the theory that he had attempted to rape Stacey. Essay For Class 8. Relying on Green v. United States, 355 U.S. 184, 189-90, 78 S.Ct. 221, 2 L.Ed.2d 199 (1957), Powell asserts that because the research paper plans, jury in his first trial rejected that theory of the husband, crime, it impliedly acquitted him of the gradation offense and, thus, he contends that the law of the case prohibits the outline plans, Commonwealth from retrying that issue under a new indictment.FN6 Powell further points to statements in the opinion from his first appeal concerning the insufficiency of the job objective, evidence to prove an attempted sexual assault of Stacey as confirming that he was charged with capital murder based on outline plans, that gradation offense. FN6. On brief, Powell also used the term “res judicata” in describing the effect of his alleged “acquittal” of the attempted rape of Stacey. During oral argument of this appeal, he conceded that he was relying only on the “law of the case” doctrine in asserting the preclusive effect of his prior trial and appeal. The Commonwealth contends that by identifying Kristie as the victim of the rape or attempted rape in responding to Powell's motion for speed research paper a bill of particulars, it had clearly indicated that Powell was not charged or on trial for outline plans the capital murder of Stacey in the commission of the attempted rape of Stacey.

Therefore, the Commonwealth asserts that Powell was never placed in jeopardy for the commission of that crime and, thus, cannot have been “acquitted” of that crime or of its gradation offense. Powell contends that “the bill of particulars is irrelevant to the issue of whether the [Supreme] Court previously decided that Powell was charged with capital murder in the commission of the attempted rape of Stacey Reed in his first trial.” Powell bases this contention on the statements in democratic congo essay, the opinion reversing his first conviction for capital murder that “[t]he record as a whole is devoid of any evidence that Powell attempted to rape . Stacey,” Powell, 261 Va. at 534, 552 S.E.2d at 357, and that “there is simply no evidence upon which the jury could have relied to find that Powell committed or attempted to commit any sexual assault against Stacey,” id. at 545, 552 S.E.2d at 363. Powell contends that by these statements we indicated that the question whether he had raped or attempted to rape Stacey had been at issue in outline, his first trial. We disagree. The question, simply put, is whether the jury in Powell's first trial considered whether Powell attempted to research rape Stacey Reed and concluded that he did not. Our guide in resolving that question is Ashe, supra, wherein the United States Supreme Court held that an issue will be precluded from outline plans being retried in a subsequent criminal prosecution by the law of the case doctrine if, in light of the entire record, the previous jury necessarily decided that issue against the prosecution. But if “a rational jury could have grounded its verdict upon an issue other than that which the defendant seeks to anne bradstreet and loving foreclose from paper consideration,” the prior judgment will not be taken as deciding that particular issue. Ashe, 397 U.S. at 444, 90 S.Ct. 1189. “The inquiry ‘must be set in a practical frame and viewed with an eye to all the republic essay, circumstances of the proceedings.’ ” Id. (quoting Sealfon v. United States, 332 U.S. 575, 579, 68 S.Ct.

237, 92 L.Ed. 180 (1948)). Powell's view of the paper plans, record of his first trial, and of this Court's observation that the evidence therein was insufficient for the jury to have found that he attempted to rape Stacey, as showing that the friend essay for class 8, previous jury necessarily decided that issue against the prosecution fails to take into account the paper plans, effect of the bill of how to write, particulars. “It is true the bill of particulars is paper outline plans not for the purpose of charging the offense. The indictment must do that.” Livingston v. Commonwealth, 184 Va. 830, 837, 36 S.E.2d 561, 565 (1946). “However, the bill of particulars and the indictment must be read together. The function of the research, bill of particulars is to supply additional information concerning an research accusation.” Id. A bill of particulars not only informs the accused of the research paper, charges against him with sufficient precision to enable him to prepare his defense and avoid surprise, it also enables him to plead his acquittal or conviction in bar of any further prosecution for the same offense. See Wade v. Commonwealth, 9 Va.App. 359, 363, 388 S.E.2d 277, 279 (1990); see also United States v. Davidoff, 845 F.2d 1151, 1154 (2d Cir.1988). The bill of particulars in paper plans, Powell's first trial clearly limited the prosecution of the capital murder of Stacey under Code § 18.2-31(5) to proof of the anne dear and loving essay, rape or attempted rape of Kristie. Nevertheless, Powell asserts that the various statements of the research outline, Commonwealth during his first trial with respect to Powell's effort to initiate consensual intercourse with Stacey, and essay his frustration at being rebuffed by her, suggested a motive for his subsequent attack on her sister and attempted to influence the jury into believing that Stacey was also the victim of an attempted sexual assault.

The fact remains that Powell was not charged with having attempted to rape Stacey, either as a separate offense or as the gradation offense of the capital murder charge. Thus, it is not possible to conclude that the jury necessarily decided that issue against the prosecution. Powell is also mistaken in his interpretation of our statements regarding his first trial that the record contained insufficient evidence for the jury to research paper have found that Powell attempted to rape Stacey. A careful reading of our opinion shows that these statements were not intended to convey that this issue was before the coke vs pepsi case, jury. To the contrary, these statements were observations made to clarify that the amended indictment must have been intended to charge Powell with the capital murder of research paper plans, Stacey premised upon the gradation offense of the rape of Kristie, but was insufficient to republic do so because of a drafting error. FN7. FN7.

We also held that the amendment of the indictment, even if properly drafted, would not have been permitted because the plans, grand jury “was never called upon to consider [the rape of Kristie] as the gradation crime for the capital murder of Stacey.” Powell, 261 Va. at 534, 552 S.E.2d at 357. Powell also contends that even if the jury had not impliedly acquitted him of the capital murder of Stacey premised on the gradation offense of her rape or attempted rape, the effect of this Court's decision in the appeal of coke vs pepsi essays, his first conviction nonetheless was to expressly acquit him of that crime because we found the evidence in that trial insufficient to support a finding of rape or attempted rape of Stacey. Relying on Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. Research Outline Plans. 1, 5-6, 98 S.Ct. 2141, 57 L.Ed.2d 1 (1978), Powell asserts that, because we held that the resume, evidence at his first trial at best would have supported a conviction for first degree murder, the trial court was bound by research that determination in any subsequent retrial. Powell contends that Burks stands for the proposition that the determination of an appellate court that the trial court erred in permitting the jury to consider a charge not supported by the evidence acts as an acquittal on that charge and that a retrial for the same offense is barred by the prohibition against double jeopardy. Our conclusion that, lacking evidence of my best essay for class 8, a sexual assault on Stacey or the attempt to commit one, Powell could be retried only for first degree murder was based upon “the circumstances of paper plans, this case.” Powell, 261 Va. at congo, 545-46, 552 S.E.2d at 363. Nothing in research, that statement implies that Powell had been acquitted of capital murder premised on any possible gradation offense, nor, as we have already demonstrated, did it preclude the Commonwealth from seeking to coke study indict Powell for the capital murder of Stacey with the paper plans, attempted rape of Stacey as the gradation offense under the exceptional circumstances occasioned by my best friend 8 Powell's voluntary confession. Accordingly, we hold that the paper outline plans, trial court did not err in denying Powell's motions to my best for class 8 dismiss the indictment for outline capital murder on the ground that the Commonwealth was prohibited from proving Powell attempted to how to rape Stacey by the law of the case of his former trial and appeal. Double Jeopardy Powell also contends that the research paper outline plans, trial court should have dismissed the indictment against paper, him because his prosecution under that indictment violated the guarantee of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States against being twice placed in jeopardy for the same offense.

Specifically, he asserts that having been indicted once for a violation of Code § 18.2-31(5) for the murder of Stacey Reed, his constitutional guarantee of research outline plans, protection against being placed in how to write a tma, double jeopardy prohibited the outline, Commonwealth from a tma indicting him a second time for that murder under the same subsection of the capital murder statute. During oral argument of this appeal, Powell acknowledged that the Commonwealth may indict and convict an accused for multiple counts of paper outline plans, capital murder of a single victim under different subsections of job objective, Code § 18.2-31 without violating the constitutional protection against double jeopardy. See Bailey v. Commonwealth, 259 Va. 723, 747, 529 S.E.2d 570, 584, cert. denied, 531 U.S. 995, 121 S.Ct. 488, 148 L.Ed.2d 460 (2000) (a single indictment may charge two counts of capital murder of the same victim under Code §§ 18.2-31(7) and 18.2-31(12)). Moreover, we have held that where a particular subsection of Code § 18.2-31 lists multiple gradation offenses, the Commonwealth may indict the accused for separate offenses of capital murder of research paper outline plans, a single victim premised on each specific gradation offense.

Payne v. Commonwealth, 257 Va. 216, 228, 509 S.E.2d 293, 301 (1999) (indictments properly charged separate violations of republic congo, Code § 18.2-31(5) premised on rape and object sexual penetration of the same victim). In Payne, we said that “it is clear, as well as logical, that the General Assembly intended for each statutory offense [in Code § 18.2-31] to be punished separately ‘as a Class 1 felony.’ ” Id. By statutory definition, capital murder is limited to the “willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing of any person” under specific circumstances or in the commission or attempted commission of certain crimes enumerated in Code § 18.2-31. Outline. We have frequently referred to these crimes as gradation offenses because, when committed as part of the same transaction as a murder, they elevate what would otherwise constitute murder of the first degree pursuant to Code § 18.2-32 to capital murder. Pertinent to and loving the present case, Code § 18.2-31(5) specifies gradation offenses of “rape or attempted rape, forcible sodomy or attempted forcible sodomy or object sexual penetration.” In Payne, we concluded that the rape and object sexual penetration of the same victim are separate and distinct gradation offenses and, therefore, support two capital murder convictions consistent with double jeopardy protections. Id. While Payne is instructive insofar as it establishes that separate and research distinct gradation offenses are enumerated in Code § 18.2-31(5), it does not resolve Powell's case. Powell's contention that he was charged with the same crime rather than with two separate crimes under the amended indictment and the 2001 indictment is principally premised upon the fact that the former failed to identify the job objective resume, victim of the paper outline, rape or attempted rape.

Because the amended indictment in his first trial, while identifying Stacey as the victim of the murder, did not specify a victim of the democratic, gradation offenses of rape or attempted rape, Powell contends that proof of the research outline, identity of the victim was not an element of those offenses. Thus, he argues that he was placed in jeopardy regardless of whether Stacey or Kristie were proven to be the victim of the gradation offenses of rape or attempted rape, and the subsequent indictment that expressly identified Stacey as the victim of attempted rape violated his constitutional guarantee against double jeopardy. We agree with Powell that when an indictment does not specify the identity of the victim of a gradation offense to the crime of resume, capital murder, the plans, identity of the victim of the gradation offense is not an element of the crime. Powell, however, has again overlooked the significance of the bill of particulars provided by the Commonwealth in speed research, his first trial. As we have already explained, the Commonwealth expressly identified Kristie as the victim of the gradation offenses for the capital murder of research outline plans, Stacey under Code § 18.2-31(5). The bill of particulars was filed well in advance of the trial and before jeopardy had attached. See Commonwealth v. Washington, 263 Va. 298, 307, 559 S.E.2d 636, 641 (2002) (“The right not to be subjected to double jeopardy attaches in how to write a tma, a criminal case when the jury is impaneled and sworn”).

During oral argument of this appeal, Powell contended that the research paper outline, bill of particulars only limits the Commonwealth's ability to argue a specific theory of the crime, does not amend the indictment, and jeopardy attaches as to paper the indictment as worded regardless of whether a bill of particulars has been filed. Research. We disagree. As noted above, while “[i]t is job objective resume true the bill of particulars is not for the purpose of charging the offense . the bill of particulars and the indictment must be read together.” Livingston, 184 Va. at 837, 36 S.E.2d at research, 565. Thus, we hold that where, prior to the attachment of friend essay for class 8, jeopardy, the Commonwealth limits the paper, prosecution of a capital murder, undifferentiated in the indictment by the identity of the to my dear and loving essay, victim of the gradation offense, by research outline plans naming a specific victim of the gradation offense in a bill of write a tma, particulars, jeopardy will attach only to paper the capital murder charge as made specific by the bill of particulars. For these reasons, we further hold that the trial court did not err in refusing to dismiss the indictment for capital murder as violative of vs pepsi case, Powell's double jeopardy protection. B. Constitutionality of Virginia's Capital Murder Statutes. In his third and eleventh assignments of outline plans, error, Powell attacks the trial court's order overruling his motions to have the resume, Virginia capital murder statutes declared unconstitutional. With respect to the motion filed April 25, 2002 and overruled by the trial court on May 6, 2002, Powell has restated, in summary fashion, five of his arguments advanced in the trial court, without citation to authority.FN8 The failure to adequately brief an assignment of error constitutes a waiver of the argument. See, e.g., Burns v. Commonwealth, 261 Va.

307, 318, 541 S.E.2d 872, 880, cert. Plans. denied, 534 U.S. 1043, 122 S.Ct. 621, 151 L.Ed.2d 542 (2001) (assignments of error not briefed are waived even where trial record contains written argument addressing same issue). FN8. At trial, Powell further contended that the expedited review of speed research paper, death sentence cases required by Code § 17.1-313 violated a defendant's constitutional right to equal protection. Powell contended that by research paper plans eliminating an intermediate review by the Court of Appeals, a defendant is denied the opportunity to perfect the issues and arguments he wishes to make on congo essay, appeal. He further contended that expediting death sentence appeals on plans, our docket “disadvantaged death-sentence defendants by providing them with substantially less time than other criminal defendants to protect their legal rights.” Powell does not reassert these issues on appeal. Moreover, the arguments raised by Powell have been previously considered and rejected by job objective resume this Court. The arguments raised by Powell and recent decisions rejecting those arguments are:

That the statutes fail to provide meaningful guidance with respect to the vileness and future dangerousness aggravating factors and that the jury is not provided adequate guidance with respect to the application of aggravating and mitigating factors. Rejected in Morrisette v. Commonwealth, 264 Va. 386, 397, 569 S.E.2d 47, 55 (2002), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1077, 124 S.Ct. 928, 157 L.Ed.2d 750 (2003). That permitting evidence of unadjudicated criminal conduct to be used to establish the defendant's future dangerousness fails to meet the “heightened reliability requirement” of the 8th and 14th Amendments.

Rejected in Bell v. Commonwealth, 264 Va. 172, 203, 563 S.E.2d 695, 716 (2002), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1123, 123 S.Ct. 860, 154 L.Ed.2d 805 (2003). That the trial court is improperly vested with discretion whether to set aside the death sentence for good cause shown and is permitted to consider hearsay evidence in the pre-sentence report. Rejected in Lenz v. Commonwealth, 261 Va. 451, 459, 544 S.E.2d 299, 303-04, cert. denied, 534 U.S. Paper. 1003, 122 S.Ct. Republic Congo Essay. 481, 151 L.Ed.2d 395 (2001). That the mandatory proportionality review procedures employed by outline plans this Court fail to meet constitutional standards. Rejected in Lovitt v. Commonwealth, 260 Va.

497, 509, 537 S.E.2d 866, 874 (2000), cert. denied, 534 U.S. Speed Paper. 815, 122 S.Ct. 41, 151 L.Ed.2d 14 (2001); Bailey, 259 Va. at 740-42, 529 S.E.2d at 580-81, cert. denied, 531 U.S. Research. 995, 121 S.Ct. 488, 148 L.Ed.2d 460 (2000). With respect to the December 11, 2002 motion, overruled by the trial court on December 23, 2002, Powell asserts, as he did in the trial court, that the United States Supreme Court's decision in democratic republic congo, Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584, 122 S.Ct. Paper. 2428, 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002), requires that “many of the friend for class 8, procedural safeguards that heretofore have only been required during the guilt/innocence phase of trial must now be extended to the sentencing phase.” Powell reasons that because Ring held that it was impermissible in a jury trial to outline allow the trial judge to determine whether there were aggravating factors sufficient to warrant the job objective resume, imposition of the outline, death penalty, id. at 609, 122 S.Ct. 2428, the how to write, aggravating factors required to plans be found by Code § 19.2-264.4(B) before a sentence of death may be imposed are “to be treated as elements of the offense of a death-eligible capital murder.” Powell contends that the standards of proof and rules of evidence applicable to the determination of guilt must also be applied to the determination of sentence, and that, contrary to decisions of this Court made prior to how to Ring, this precludes the Commonwealth from paper outline plans presenting under a “relaxed evidentiary standard” evidence of unadjudicated criminal conduct or hearsay evidence when the declarant is not available for cross-examination as required by the confrontation clause.

The Commonwealth responds that Ring does not alter the analysis of the constitutionality of the congo essay, procedures applied during the penalty determination phase of a capital murder trial in research paper plans, Virginia. Rather, the Commonwealth contends that the procedures for the admission of relevant evidence during the penalty determination phase under Code § 19.2-264.4(B) continue to be fully in accord with the Sixth Amendment due process concerns underpinning the decision in Ring. We agree with the Commonwealth. First, we note that Powell's expansive reading of Ring is unwarranted for the obvious reason that the statutory scheme at issue in that case, which permitted the resume, judge in plans, a capital murder jury trial to assume the role of the jury in determining whether aggravating factors permitting the imposition of the death penalty were present, is markedly different from that of republic, Virginia's death penalty sentencing statute. See Ring, 536 U.S. at 588. Moreover, nothing in the United States Supreme Court's opinion in Ring suggests that the Court intended to revisit broader issues of due process protections afforded in the penalty determination phase of all capital murder trials. We further reject Powell's contention that there is a “relaxed evidentiary standard” applicable to the penalty determination phase of a capital murder trial in research plans, Virginia. To the contrary, Code § 19.2-264.4(B) expressly provides, and we have consistently held, that the Commonwealth must prove the existence of one or both aggravating factors beyond a reasonable doubt. See, e.g., Clark v. Commonwealth, 220 Va. 201, 212, 257 S.E.2d 784, 791 (1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S.

1049, 100 S.Ct. 741, 62 L.Ed.2d 736 (1980). Job Objective Resume. Powell's contention that the introduction of evidence of unadjudicated criminal acts is plans not admissible because Ring somehow refines the need for “heightened reliability” in capital sentencing is, as the Commonwealth notes, nothing more than a reassertion of the democratic congo essay, same argument raised in his prior motion and consistently rejected by this Court. Jackson v. Commonwealth, 267 Va. 178, 188, 590 S.E.2d 520, 526 (2004) (today decided). Powell's assertion that Code § 19.2-264.4(B) permits the introduction of hearsay evidence not otherwise subject to research paper plans an exception is simply wrong.FN9 See, e.g., Lovitt v. A Tma. Warden, 266 Va. 216, 259, 585 S.E.2d 801, 826 (2003); Jackson, 267 Va. at outline, 188, 590 S.E.2d at 526. For these reasons, we hold that the republic essay, trial court did not err in overruling Powell's motion to have the Virginia capital murder statutes declared unconstitutional. FN9.

On brief, the Commonwealth suggests that Powell has confused the evidentiary standard applicable to the penalty determination phase with that applicable to research outline plans the trial court's consideration of the presentence report. Powell did not respond to this assertion in his reply brief and does not otherwise assert that Ring has any implication to the post-verdict sentencing procedure. Accordingly, we express no opinion on that issue. C. My Best Friend For Class 8. Failure to Disqualify the Commonwealth's Attorney In his tenth assignment of error, Powell contends that the trial court erred in failing to grant his motion to outline plans disqualify the Commonwealth's Attorney and coke study essays his office from prosecuting Powell on research outline plans, the new indictment. Powell asserts the “grossly offensive personal attacks” on the Commonwealth's Attorney in Powell's October 21, 2001 letter, created a direct conflict of interest because the Commonwealth's Attorney “had a personal stake in the outcome of this case.” This is so, Powell contends, because the personal attacks in his letter “undoubtedly led [the Commonwealth's Attorney] to have feelings of animosity towards Powell.” The Commonwealth responds that the democratic republic congo essay, Commonwealth's Attorney represented to the trial court that he could impartially prosecute the case and that it was a matter within the paper plans, trial court's discretion to determine whether to disqualify him. Democratic Congo. We agree with the research plans, Commonwealth. The due process rights of a criminal defendant under both the how to, Virginia and United States Constitutions are violated when a Commonwealth's Attorney who has a conflict of research outline plans, interest relevant to the defendant's case prosecutes the defendant. See Cantrell v. Commonwealth, 229 Va. 387, 394, 329 S.E.2d 22, 26-27 (1985); Ganger v. Peyton, 379 F.2d 709, 714 (4th Cir.1967).

However, the essay, question whether there is a conflict of paper, interest is dependent upon the circumstances of the coke vs pepsi study essays, individual case, and the burden is on plans, the party seeking disqualification of the prosecutor to write present evidence establishing the research plans, existence of how to, disqualifying bias or prejudice. The determination whether the evidence supports a finding of a conflict of interest is a matter committed to the sound discretion of the trial court. See Lux v. Commonwealth, 24 Va.App. 561, 569, 484 S.E.2d 145, 149 (1997). The issue may arise where the prosecutor has had an attorney-client relationship with the parties involved whereby he obtained privileged information that may be adverse to the defendant's interest in regard to research outline plans the pending criminal charges. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Kilgore, 15 Va.App. 684, 694, 426 S.E.2d 837, 842 (1993).

A second situation is where the prosecutor has some direct personal interest arising from coke vs pepsi case study essays a financial interest, kinship, or close friendship such that his objectivity and impartiality are called into question. Research Paper Outline Plans. See, e.g., Cantrell, 229 Va. at coke vs pepsi case essays, 391-94, 329 S.E.2d at 24-27. Neither of these circumstances applies to research outline plans the present case. Beyond these categories of clear and direct conflicts of interest and ethical bars to a particular attorney prosecuting a particular defendant, there is the broader consideration of whether, on the facts of a particular case, the essays, adversarial nature of the judicial process has resulted in research outline plans, such enmity toward the defendant on the part of the prosecutor that it will overbear his professional judgment in seeking fairly and impartially to see justice done. See Lux, 24 Va.App. at 569, 484 S.E.2d at 149. As the United States Supreme Court has observed in a related context, “ ‘[i]mpartiality is not gullibility.

Disinterestedness does not mean child-like innocence.’ ” Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 551, 114 S.Ct. 1147, 127 L.Ed.2d 474 (1994) (quoting In re J.P. Linahan, Inc., 138 F.2d 650, 654 (2nd Cir.1943)). We are of opinion that the same can be said of the prosecutor's role. The adversarial nature of criminal prosecutions unsurprisingly tends to engender some level of friction between the prosecutor and the defendant in difficult cases, especially where, as here, the defendant seems intent on showing his contempt and disrespect for the prosecutor. However, merely demonstrating a history of one-sided acrimony between the defendant and the prosecutor is insufficient to establish a conflict of interest or prosecutorial misconduct with respect to an otherwise proper prosecution. See, e.g., Phelps v. Hamilton, 59 F.3d 1058, 1067 (10th Cir.1995). If such were not the case, a defendant would have an incentive to deliberately incite such enmity. The evidence must reflect that the prosecutor is acting not within the dictates of the law, but has strayed outside those parameters in furtherance of a personal animus against the defendant.

Powell's October 21, 2001 letter undoubtedly was intended to anne dear and loving insult, if not incense, the research outline plans, Commonwealth's Attorney. But, the trial court was within its discretion to accept the Commonwealth's Attorney's assurance that it had not had an effect on his professional judgment in seeking fairly and impartially to see justice done. Moreover, nothing in the Commonwealth's Attorney's conduct of the trial evinces any lack of such professional judgment on his part. Accordingly, we hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling Powell's motion to disqualify the Commonwealth's Attorney. D. Failure to Exclude Testimony of Kristie Reed. In his ninth assignment of error, Powell contends that the trial court erred in permitting the Commonwealth to call Kristie as a witness and to give testimony concerning Powell's rape and attempted murder of essay for class, her during the guilt determination phase of research paper outline plans, his trial.FN10 He asserts that evidence of the events following the my best friend for class 8, murder of Stacey was not relevant to prove his culpability for outline that crime and that such evidence was, in any case, unduly prejudicial.FN11.

FN10. In his pre-trial motion, Powell sought to exclude all evidence of his rape and attempted murder of Kristie. On appeal, he has limited his argument to the exclusion of her testimony and the exhibits introduced in its course. FN11. Powell also asserts that Kristie's testimony was unnecessary because it was cumulative of other evidence and should more properly have been received as “victim impact testimony” during sentencing. These arguments were not made at trial and, thus, are barred from consideration in coke vs pepsi case study, this appeal. Research Paper Outline Plans. Rule 5:25. The Commonwealth responds that evidence of the rape and attempted murder of Kristie, including her testimony and its supporting exhibits, was admissible because those acts were interrelated parts of essays, a common criminal plan and, thus, were relevant to prove Powell's identity, motive, and intent as the perpetrator of all the crimes committed in outline, the course of carrying out that plan. How To. In addition, the Commonwealth contends that evidence of the subsequent attack on Kristie was probative of research plans, Powell's state of mind during the entire criminal enterprise and, thus, admissible to show premeditation in the killing of Stacey to rebut Powell's claim that the killing was accidental. We agree with the Commonwealth. Generally, evidence of other offenses is inadmissible in a criminal prosecution, but it is a well-established exception that such evidence is admissible to job objective show a common criminal scheme when the various acts are naturally explained as the constituent parts of the defendant's general plan.

See Satcher v. Commonwealth, 244 Va. 220, 230, 421 S.E.2d 821, 828 (1992), cert. Research Paper. denied, 507 U.S. 933, 113 S.Ct. 1319, 122 L.Ed.2d 705 (1993); Kirkpatrick v. Commonwealth, 211 Va. 269, 272, 176 S.E.2d 802, 805 (1970); McWhorter v. Commonwealth, 191 Va. 857, 870-71, 63 S.E.2d 20, 26 (1951). In Kirkpatrick we explained that: [e]vidence of other offenses is admitted if it shows the conduct and feeling of the bradstreet to my and loving, accused toward his victim . or if it tends to prove any relevant element of the plans, offense charged. Such evidence is resume permissible in cases where the motive, intent or knowledge of the accused is involved, or where the evidence is connected with . the offense for which the accused is on trial.

211 Va. at 272, 176 S.E.2d at 805; see also Satcher, 244 Va. at 230, 421 S.E.2d at 828. There can be no question that it was the Commonwealth's theory in this trial, and taking the evidence in the light favorable to the Commonwealth it is an unassailable fact, that Powell went to the Reed home with the intention of raping and killing both Stacey and plans Kristie. As such, the evidence of Powell's rape and coke essays attempted murder of Kristie was directly probative of his motive and intent in the attempted rape and paper plans murder of Stacey. Job Objective Resume. Moreover, Kristie's eyewitness testimony placing Powell in the home when she arrived and identifying him as her assailant was critical to establishing Powell's identity as the perpetrator of the crimes that preceded the criminal acts committed against her. Powell's contention that the graphic and emotional testimony of the victim of outline plans, a brutal rape and attempted murder should have been excluded because its probative value was outweighed by the prejudice it would cause in the minds of the jury is equally without merit. All evidence tending to prove guilt is case study prejudicial to an accused, but the mere fact that such evidence is plans powerful because it accurately depicts the gravity and atrociousness of the crime or the callous nature of the defendant does not thereby render it inadmissible. Moreover, direct evidence, such as eyewitness testimony, is rarely subject to democratic exclusion on research plans, the ground that it would be unduly prejudicial.

In any case, determination of the issue is committed to the sound discretion of the trial court. Spencer v. Commonwealth, 240 Va. 78, 90, 393 S.E.2d 609, 617, cert. denied, 498 U.S. 908, 111 S.Ct. 281, 112 L.Ed.2d 235, (1990). Accordingly, we hold that the trial court did not err in failing to grant Powell's pre-trial motion to exclude the anne bradstreet to my and loving, testimony of paper, Kristie Reed from the guilt determination phase of the trial.

E. Failure to Suppress Powell's Statements to Police. In his twelfth assignment of anne to my and loving husband, error, Powell contends that “[t]he trial court erred in not suppressing Powell's statements to police.” Although he uses the plural term “statements” in the assignment of error and makes references to the ability of an accused to revoke a prior waiver of his right to remain silent, Powell does not expressly restate the contention made in the trial court that statements made during the outline, initial investigation prior to bradstreet to my essay his first trial should have been suppressed because at the conclusion of his first interview he stated that he had nothing more to say. Research Plans. Because Powell has not expressly raised this issue on brief or during oral argument, it has been waived and we will not address it. Study Essays. Burns, 261 Va. at 318, 541 S.E.2d at 880. Powell does assert that the trial court erred in not suppressing the statement concerning Powell's October 21, 2001 letter that he made on November 2, 2001 while in prison to an investigator. Powell contends that because he was still represented by counsel from his first trial, the investigator should not have questioned him without his counsel being present. The Commonwealth responds that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel had not attached with respect to research outline the crime for which the investigator was gathering evidence and for which Powell would be indicted as a result of the evidence in his October 21, 2001 letter.

Moreover, as Powell executed a waiver of republic, his Fifth Amendment rights immediately prior to giving the November 2, 2001 statement, the outline plans, Commonwealth contends that the statement was properly admitted. We agree with the Commonwealth. The Sixth Amendment right to counsel “arises from the fact that the suspect has been formally charged with a particular crime and thus is bradstreet to my and loving husband facing a state apparatus that has been geared up to prosecute him.” Arizona v. Roberson, 486 U.S. Research. 675, 685, 108 S.Ct. 2093, 100 L.Ed.2d 704 (1988); see also Alston v. Commonwealth, 264 Va. 433, 437, 570 S.E.2d 801, 803 (2002). We have already determined that the crime for which Powell was tried and convicted in the present case was a separate offense from those for resume which he had been previously convicted. Powell had not been formally charged with that offense when he was interviewed on November 2, 2001 and, thus, he was not entitled to have his counsel from research his prior trial present during that interview.

Eaton v. Commonwealth, 240 Va. 236, 252, 397 S.E.2d 385, 394 (1990), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 824, 112 S.Ct. 88, 116 L.Ed.2d 60 (1991). Job Objective Resume. As Powell does not dispute that he freely and paper outline plans knowingly waived his Fifth Amendment right to counsel at the time of the interview, we hold that the trial court did not err in failing to suppress Powell's statement. F. Limiting Voir Dire and Failure to Strike Jury Panel. In his fourth assignment of error, Powell contends that the trial court erred in not permitting him to speed research paper question prospective jurors about whether knowledge of research paper, Powell's prior conviction for capital murder and its subsequent reversal on appeal would influence their opinion as to his guilt. Powell concedes that a prospective juror with knowledge of a defendant's prior conviction is subject to disqualification on that ground. Barker, 230 Va. at 375, 337 S.E.2d at write, 733. But see Patton v. Yount, 467 U.S. 1025, 1035, 104 S.Ct.

2885, 81 L.Ed.2d 847 (1984) (refusing to grant a new trial where several jurors had pretrial knowledge of the defendant's prior conviction for the same crime). Powell contends, however, that in his case the jury would ultimately learn of his prior conviction during the trial and, thus, asserts that he should have been able to research outline plans question jurors on the effect this evidence would have on them. The purpose of voir dire is “to ascertain whether [a prospective juror] is related to resume either party, or has any interest in the cause, or has expressed or formed any opinion, or is research plans sensible of any bias or prejudice therein.” Code § 8.01-358. To that end, prospective jurors may be asked any question relevant to determine whether they may be subject to being removed from the venire for cause. The test of relevancy is my best 8 whether the questions relate to any of the four criteria set forth in the statute.

If an answer to research paper outline plans the question would necessarily disclose, or clearly lead to the disclosure of the statutory factors of relationship, interest, opinion, or prejudice, it must be permitted. LeVasseur v. Commonwealth, 225 Va. 564, 581, 304 S.E.2d 644, 653 (1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1063, 104 S.Ct. 744, 79 L.Ed.2d 202 (1984) The question that Powell attempted to ask the first panel of the venire was not one that “would necessarily disclose, or clearly lead to the disclosure of the statutory factors of relationship, interest, opinion, or prejudice” of the prospective jurors. The panel had already indicted that they had no prior knowledge of the case and how to write a tma had not formed an opinion as to Powell's guilt or innocence. Powell's question would not have revealed any preexisting opinion or bias with respect to his case, but would instead have served to test the jurors' potential response to the evidence that he expected the Commonwealth to present.

Whether to permit a party to ask a question that goes beyond what is permissible under Code § 8.01-358 is research paper plans a matter entirely within the research, trial court's discretion. Id. We hold that the trial court did not err in refusing to permit Powell to test the paper, potential response of the jurors to the evidence that would be adduced at trial concerning his prior conviction. In his eighth assignment of error, Powell contends that, having denied him the speed, opportunity to question the potential jurors on research paper, this point, the trial court should have disqualified for cause the five members of the a tma, first panel because his attempt to question them provided them with knowledge that he had been previously convicted for the capital murder of Stacey Reed. Thus, he contends that these jurors were subject to paper automatic exclusion under Barker. Even if we were to agree that Powell's curtailed question provided the how to a tma, five prospective jurors with sufficient information to raise the concern for potential prejudice that the jurors' full knowledge of the defendant's prior conviction raised in Barker, that circumstance arose here through Powell's own conduct during the voir dire.

The record demonstrates that Powell's counsel was fully aware that advising the prospective jurors that Powell had been previously convicted of capital murder carried with it the research outline plans, potential for creating bias against his client, but apparently deemed this risk acceptable in my best friend essay for class 8, order to seek the outline plans, strategic advantage of being able to test the a tma, jurors' potential response to the evidence concerning that conviction during the trial. Counsel further recognized the risk that the trial court would not permit him to pursue that line of questioning, and, as we have just determined, was within its discretion to do so. Under the “invited error” doctrine Powell may not benefit from his counsel's voluntary, strategic choice to place Powell at a potential disadvantage in the hope, unproductive though it was, of gaining some advantage. Outline Plans. See, e.g., Moore v. Hinkle, 259 Va. 479, 491, 527 S.E.2d 419, 426 (2000); Saunders v. Commonwealth, 211 Va.

399, 400, 177 S.E.2d 637, 638 (1970); Clark v. Commonwealth, 202 Va. 787, 791, 120 S.E.2d 270, 273 (1961). “No litigant, even a defendant in a criminal case, will be permitted to approbate and reprobate-to invite error . and then to take advantage of the situation created by his own wrong.” Fisher v. Commonwealth, 236 Va. 403, 417, 374 S.E.2d 46, 54 (1988), cert. My Best Essay. denied, 490 U.S. 1028, 109 S.Ct. Plans. 1766, 104 L.Ed.2d 201 (1989). Accordingly, we hold that the trial court did not err in refusing to strike the members of the first voir dire panel for cause under the particular circumstances created by Powell in this case. G. Failure to Strike the Evidence. In his fifth assignment of error, Powell contends that the trial court erred in failing to congo strike the evidence as to capital murder on the ground that the Commonwealth had not adequately corroborated his confession in the October 21, 2001 letter of having attempted to rape Stacey. Thus, Powell contends that the evidence at best would have supported a conviction for paper plans first degree murder. How To Write A Tma. We disagree.

Although the Commonwealth may not establish an plans essential element of a crime by democratic essay the uncorroborated confession of the research paper outline, accused alone, “ ‘only slight corroborative evidence’ ” is necessary to show the a tma, veracity of the confession. Williams v. Commonwealth, 234 Va. 168, 175, 360 S.E.2d 361, 366 (1987) (quoting Clozza v. Commonwealth, 228 Va. 124, 133, 321 S.E.2d 273, 279 (1984), cert. Research Paper Outline Plans. denied, 469 U.S. 1230, 105 S.Ct. Anne Bradstreet And Loving Husband. 1233, 84 L.Ed.2d 370 (1985)), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1020, 108 S.Ct. 733, 98 L.Ed.2d 681 (1988). Plans. What is more, if “[t]his corroborating evidence is consistent with a reasonable inference” that the accused committed the crime to which he has confessed, the Commonwealth need not establish through direct evidence those elements of the my best 8, crime that are proven by the confession. See Jackson v. Commonwealth, 255 Va. 625, 646, 499 S.E.2d 538, 551 (1998), cert. denied, 525 U.S.

1067, 119 S.Ct. 796, 142 L.Ed.2d 658 (1999). Contrary to Powell's contention that there is not even “slight” corroborative evidence to paper support the reliability of his confession, the forensic evidence and direct testimony are consistent with and substantiate Powell's version of “the rest of what happened” in every relevant respect. Powell's going to the home armed when he knew Stacey would be there alone, Stacey's defensive wounds, the evidence that her pants' zipper was slightly undone, the coke study essays, subsequent rape of Kristie, and Powell's later concession that he raped Kristie because he “didn't get any with Stacey” all corroborate his confession to the attempted rape of Stacey in paper, the October 21, 2001 letter. Accordingly, we hold that the speed paper, trial court did not err in overruling Powell's motion to strike the evidence as to capital murder premised on paper outline, the attempted rape of Stacey. H. Mandatory Sentence Review In his first and second assignments of error, Powell contends that the study, jury imposed the sentence of paper, death under the influence of passion, prejudice, or some other arbitrary factor and that the sentence of research paper, death is outline disproportionate to the penalty imposed in other cases considering both the crime and the defendant. As noted above, these two assignments of error parallel the mandatory review of how to a tma, every death sentence this Court conducts pursuant to paper outline Code § 17.1-313(C). Accordingly, we will combine the mandatory review of Powell's death sentence with our discussion of the job objective, issues raised by Powell in his assignments of paper, error. Powell contends that “[t]he sensational nature of [Kristie Reed's] testimony virtually assured [Powell] would receive a sentence of death.” This is dear and loving husband essay so, he asserts, because “the graphic and irrelevant evidence about the outline plans, attack on Kristie” would have enraged the jury and rendered it unable to reach an impartial verdict.

We have already determined that evidence of the rape and attempted murder of how to write, Kristie was relevant and admissible during the guilt determination phase of the trial. Similarly, Powell's rape and attempted murder of Kristie was relevant for the jury's consideration of his future dangerousness during the penalty determination phase of the trial. Accordingly, Powell's assertion that the jury was influenced by “irrelevant” evidence is research paper plans without merit. However, while graphic evidence of dear and loving husband essay, a violent crime is admissible in research plans, the guilt determination phase of a capital murder trial, we will also consider the potential impact such evidence may have had on the jury's decision to impose the death sentence during the penalty determination phase. The brutal rape and vs pepsi case study essays attempted murder of research outline plans, a thirteen-year-old child are undoubtedly among the most abhorrent crimes that can be placed in evidence before a jury contemplating whether to impose a sentence of death upon a defendant. Nonetheless, the mere fact that the jury is presented with such evidence does not raise a presumption that the jury will be unable to set aside its natural emotions and fairly consider all the evidence. See Bailey, 259 Va. at democratic, 751, 529 S.E.2d at 586 (evidence of infanticide and plans uxoricide, though abhorrent crimes, did not preclude jury from write a tma making a rational sentencing determination in a capital murder trial). Powell further contends that the trial court erred in submitting to research outline the jury a verdict form that permitted it to impose a sentence of life imprisonment and a fine but which did not expressly parallel the for class, trial court's sentencing instructions by stating that this form was to outline plans be used if the jury found that neither aggravating factor had been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

He asserts that this alleged error requires that this Court set aside the death sentence. Powell concedes that he did not raise this issue at trial, but nonetheless contends that it is proper for this Court to consider his argument as part of the mandatory review of his sentence, apparently contending that an erroneous verdict form would constitute an “arbitrary factor” that would influence the jury's sentencing decision. Our review of the record in this case does not disclose that the jury failed to give fair consideration to all the evidence both in coke essays, favor and in mitigation of the death sentence. Moreover, the jury was properly instructed upon the sentences available and the basis for imposing them and the record supports the jury's determination to impose a sentence of death upon research paper plans, a finding that both aggravating factors were proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Job Objective. We find nothing to suggest that the research paper outline plans, jury, or the trial court in reviewing the verdict, imposed the job objective resume, death sentence under the influence of passion, prejudice, or other arbitrary factors.

Accordingly, we hold that the sentence of death was not imposed under passion, prejudice, or any arbitrary factor. In a separate section of research paper outline, his brief, ostensibly related to coke vs pepsi study the assignment of plans, error paralleling the how to, passion, prejudice and paper arbitrary factor aspect of our mandatory review, Powell asserts that the alleged error in the wording of the life sentence verdict form should result in my best for class, the reversal of his death sentence and a remand for a new sentencing proceeding. While we consider the entire record of a capital murder trial to determine whether the sentence of death should be set aside because of improper influence on the jury, we have previously rejected the contention that the “arbitrary factor” language of Code § 17.1-313(C)(1) permits a defendant to raise as a separate issue on appeal an issue barred by the failure to make a proper objection in the trial court by contending that the error influenced the jury's sentencing decision. See Quintana v. Research Outline Plans. Commonwealth, 224 Va. 127, 148 n. 6, 152 n. 7, 295 S.E.2d 643, 653 n. Job Objective Resume. 6, 656 n. 7 (1982) (rejecting assertion in research paper outline plans, dissenting opinion that mandatory review permitted challenge to form of speed, jury verdict to outline plans be raised for the first time on appeal). Accordingly, while Powell is not precluded from arguing that the alleged error in the life sentence verdict form improperly influenced the resume, jury's sentencing decision as a basis for research paper outline commuting the death sentence, we will not consider his separate argument under the same assignment of error as a basis for reversing that sentence and ordering a new sentencing proceeding.FN12.

FN12. Job Objective Resume. Powell also contends that the “ends of justice” exception of Rule 5:25 would permit us to consider the alleged error in the life sentence verdict form as a basis for reversing his death sentence and ordering a new sentencing proceeding. However, as Powell cannot argue for reversal of research outline, his death sentence under the speed paper, assignment of research outline, error paralleling the mandatory review of that sentence and failed to make this issue the subject of job objective, a separate assignment of error, the paper plans, issue is not properly before us. Rule 5:17. Accordingly, we will not address this issue as a basis for reversing the sentence of death and remanding for a new sentencing proceeding. Powell contends that the death sentenced imposed upon him is excessive or disproportionate when compared to coke case similar cases considering both the crime and the defendant.

Powell's sole contention is research that his history of mental health problems and his failure to receive adequate treatment when in state custody as a juvenile militates against the appropriateness of the how to a tma, death penalty in his case. We disagree. Code § 19.2-264.4(B) lists as a mitigating factor the fact that “the capacity of the defendant to appreciate the criminality of research, his conduct or to research paper conform his conduct to the requirements of law was significantly impaired.” The psychologist called by Powell did not offer a specific diagnosis of paper outline plans, Powell's mental health problems, merely classifying them generally as suggesting an anti-social personality disorder and “a mood disorder, primarily depressive in nature . For Class 8. characterized by irritability, short temper and so forth.” The psychologist did not testify that Powell lacked the ability to appreciate the criminality of outline plans, his conduct or that his condition significantly impaired his ability to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. The jury heard this testimony concerning Powell's mental health problems, and we must assume that the jury followed the case study essays, trial court's instruction to consider evidence presented in mitigation. Research Paper Outline Plans. The jury clearly concluded that Powell's history of mental health problems did not mitigate his offense. See Swann v. Republic Congo Essay. Commonwealth, 247 Va.

222, 238-39, 441 S.E.2d 195, 206-07, cert. denied, 513 U.S. 889, 115 S.Ct. 234, 130 L.Ed.2d 158 (1994) (death sentence imposed despite “history of mental health hospitalization and treatment”); Hoke v. Commonwealth, 237 Va. 303, 313, 377 S.E.2d 595, 601, cert. denied, 491 U.S. 910, 109 S.Ct. 3201, 105 L.Ed.2d 709 (1989) (death sentence imposed despite evidence of defendant's prior confinement in nine or ten mental hospitals); Giarratano v. Commonwealth, 220 Va.

1064, 1076-79, 266 S.E.2d 94, 101-103 (1980) (death sentence imposed despite mitigating evidence of defendant's “schizoid personality disturbance” and “extreme mental and emotional disturbance”). Apart from paper outline plans Powell's contention that his history of mental health problems should preclude the imposition of a death sentence in his case, we are required by Code § 17.1-313(C)(2) to conduct a comparative review of the write a tma, death sentence imposed in this case with other capital murder cases, including those where a life sentence was imposed. “The purpose of our comparative review is to reach a reasoned judgment regarding what cases justify the imposition of the paper outline plans, death penalty.” Orbe v. Commonwealth, 258 Va. Job Objective Resume. 390, 405, 519 S.E.2d 808, 817 (1999), cert. denied, 529 U.S. 1113, 120 S.Ct. 1970, 146 L.Ed.2d 800 (2000). Research Paper Outline. In conducting this statutorily mandated review in this case, we have focused on job objective resume, cases in which the victim was murdered during the commission of rape or attempted rape, and in research paper outline, which the sentence of death was imposed based on findings of both future dangerousness and vileness.

See, e.g., Patterson v. Commonwealth, 262 Va. 301, 551 S.E.2d 332 (2001); Swisher v. Commonwealth, 256 Va. 471, 506 S.E.2d 763 (1998), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 812, 120 S.Ct. 46, 145 L.Ed.2d 41 (1999); Pruett v. Commonwealth, 232 Va. 266, 351 S.E.2d 1 (1986), cert. denied, 482 U.S. 931, 107 S.Ct. 3220, 96 L.Ed.2d 706 (1987); Coleman v. Commonwealth, 226 Va. 31, 307 S.E.2d 864 (1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1109, 104 S.Ct. My Best Essay For Class 8. 1617, 80 L.Ed.2d 145 (1984); Mason v. Commonwealth, 219 Va.

1091, 254 S.E.2d 116, cert. denied, 444 U.S. 919, 100 S.Ct. Outline Plans. 239, 62 L.Ed.2d 176 (1979); Smith v. Commonwealth, 219 Va. 455, 248 S.E.2d 135 (1978), cert. denied, 441 U.S. Speed Research. 967, 99 S.Ct.

2419, 60 L.Ed.2d 1074 (1979). We have also considered cases in which defendants received life sentences, rather than the death penalty, for capital murder during the commission of rape or attempted rape. See, e.g., Horne v. Commonwealth, 230 Va. 512, 339 S.E.2d 186 (1986); Keil v. Commonwealth, 222 Va. 99, 278 S.E.2d 826 (1981). Considering all the factors revealed by the record, both those favoring imposition of the death sentence and those in mitigation against it, we hold that the sentence is neither excessive nor disproportionate to the penalties imposed by other sentencing bodies in the Commonwealth for comparable crimes. Having found no error below and perceiving no other reason to research paper outline plans commute or set aside the paper, sentence of death, we will affirm the judgment of the trial court. Powell v. Warden of outline, Sussex I State Prison , 634 S.E.2d 289 (Va.

2006) (State Habeas). Background: Following affirmance of his conviction of essay for class, capital murder and sentence of death, 267 Va. 107, 590 S.E.2d 537, defendant filed petition for writ of habeas corpus. The Supreme Court entered order rejecting all of defendant's habeas corpus claims. Defendant filed a petition for rehearing. Holding: On grant of petition for paper plans rehearing, the Supreme Court, Leroy R. Hassell, Sr., J., held that trial counsel's failure to object during penalty phase to democratic republic essay admission of a form that contained an incorrect entry that defendant had a prior conviction for plans capital murder did not prejudice defendant, and thus did not constitute ineffective assistance.

Petition dismissed. OPINION BY Chief Justice LEROY R. HASSELL, SR. In this habeas corpus proceeding, we consider whether petitioner, who was convicted of capital murder for the killing of Stacey Lynn Reed during the commission of or subsequent to an attempted rape in violation of Code § 18.2-31(5), suffered prejudice within the meaning of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984) because his trial counsel failed to object to the admission in evidence of a form that contained an inaccuracy regarding petitioner's criminal history. In September 2000, Paul Warner Powell was sentenced to death for how to the capital murder of Stacey Lynn Reed. On direct appeal, this Court reversed the research paper outline plans, conviction and remanded the case to the circuit court for a new trial on a charge no greater than first-degree murder for the killing of Stacey Reed, if the Commonwealth be so advised.

Powell v. Commonwealth, 261 Va. My Best Essay. 512, 552 S.E.2d 344 (2001). After the proceeding was remanded, Powell wrote a letter to paper outline the Commonwealth's Attorney who had prosecuted Powell during the first trial. Powell described, in democratic republic essay, detail, the murder and attempted rape of research outline plans, Stacey Reed, and how to a tma he provided facts that were previously unknown to the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth then nolle prossed the indictment in the remanded case. A grand jury for Prince William County subsequently indicted Powell for the capital murder of Stacey Reed during the outline plans, commission of or subsequent to an attempted rape.

Powell was tried by a jury that convicted him of capital murder and fixed his punishment at death. The circuit court entered a judgment confirming the jury's verdict and we affirmed that judgment. Powell v. Commonwealth, 267 Va. My Best Essay For Class. 107, 590 S.E.2d 537 (2004). Subsequently, Powell filed a petition for research plans habeas corpus in this Court alleging numerous claims, including ineffective assistance of job objective, counsel. During the sentencing hearing, the Commonwealth introduced in evidence, without objection, Exhibit 51 that is attached to this opinion. Exhibit 51, captioned Powell's “Virginia Criminal Record,” consists of five pages and was generated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Crime Information Center. Powell asserts, among other things, that trial counsel were ineffective, and he was prejudiced by their failure to object to this document and the inaccuracy contained therein.

We entered an research outline plans order rejecting all Powell's habeas corpus claims. Powell v. Warden of the Sussex I State Prison, Record No. 042716, 2005 WL 2980756 (Nov. 8, 2005). Powell filed a petition for rehearing and requested that this Court reconsider its order dismissing his habeas claims, including his claim that he was denied effective assistance of counsel because of counsel's failure to speed paper object to an erroneous entry on page three of Exhibit 51. This Court granted Powell a rehearing limited to that one claim, and we placed this matter on research outline plans, our argument docket. III.

The following facts were presented to the jury that found Powell guilty of capital murder and coke vs pepsi case study fixed his punishment at death. In January 1999, Robert Culver and his fiance, Lorraine Reed, lived together in Manassas, Virginia, with Reed's two daughters, Stacey Lynn Reed and Kristie Erin Reed. Outline. On January 28, 1999, Powell went to the Reeds' home. Coke Vs Pepsi Case Study. Stacey, then 16 years old, left home to go to work, and research outline Powell remained there alone with Kristie, who was 14. That afternoon, Kristie called her mother by telephone and informed her that Powell refused to leave the home. Kristie's mother told Kristie to order Powell to leave. Kristie was concerned because Powell “kept walking back and to my dear essay forth down the hallway looking in research plans, the rooms.” On the afternoon of January 29, 1999, Kristie arrived home from school and was startled to find Powell in her house. She asked Powell “where Stacey was.” He replied, “she was in her room.” Kristie walked to Stacey's room, but Stacey was not there.

Then, Kristie turned to enter her own room and saw Stacey's body lying on the floor. Powell, who had followed Kristie to the bedroom, ordered Kristie to go downstairs to the basement. Kristie knew that Powell customarily armed himself with a knife. She had previously observed Powell with a butterfly knife and “another long knife that was in a brown pouch type thing.” Powell forced Kristie to accompany him to the basement, where he ordered her to remove her clothes. How To A Tma. She took her clothes off because she “didn't want to research outline plans die.” Powell told Kristie to vs pepsi case essays lay on the floor, and then he raped her. After Powell raped Kristie, he dressed himself, and he used shoelaces taken from Kristie's shoes to tie her feet together.

He also used shoelaces to research outline tie her arms behind her back. Someone knocked on the door to the house, and Powell went upstairs, leaving Kristie naked and bound on the basement floor. While Powell was upstairs, Kristie was able to free her hands, and she tried to “scoot” across the floor and hide beneath the basement steps. Powell returned to democratic congo the basement, removed Kristie's eyeglasses, and strangled her until she was unconscious. Powell stabbed Kristie in outline plans, the stomach, and resume the knife stopped within a centimeter of her aorta. He slashed her in her neck numerous times, and the repair of the knife wounds required 61 sutures. She had multiple stab wounds to paper plans her neck and abdomen.

She also had wounds on her wrists. Robert Culver arrived at the home at 4:15 p.m. on January 29, 1999. He could not locate Kristie or Stacey. My Best Friend For Class. He went to research paper plans the girls' bedrooms and saw that Stacey's room was in disarray. He entered Kristie's room, turned on democratic essay, the lights, and research paper plans found Stacey's body on the floor. He observed blood on paper, her body and saw that she was not breathing. When Culver went to the basement in search of a telephone, he discovered Kristie lying naked and bound on research plans, the floor, bleeding from her neck and stomach. He saw that she had been stabbed in the stomach and her “throat was slit pretty severely, many times.” Culver found a telephone, dialed 911, and spoke to emergency response personnel. Although Kristie was experiencing life-threatening injuries, she was able to tell police officers and vs pepsi essays paramedics that Paul Powell was her assailant. Stacey's death was caused by paper outline plans a stab wound to her chest. The wound pattern indicated that the blade of the knife pierced her heart and was twisted upon withdrawal.

The blade of Powell's knife was consistent with the stab wounds. There were numerous bruises on Stacey's head, neck, chest, abdomen, back, arms, and bradstreet essay legs. She suffered stab wounds in her back and arm. Research Paper Plans. She also had abrasions on her left hand and wrist that were characterized as defensive wounds. Essay 8. Stacey's body contained bruises on her lower neck that were consistent with someone stepping or stomping on her face and research plans neck. Police officers arrested Powell on January 30, 1999 at the home of a friend. The police officers also located a blue sports bag that belonged to Powell. A nine-millimeter semiautomatic pistol with a full magazine containing 10 Winchester nine-millimeter cartridges was in speed paper, the bag. The bag also contained a survival knife with a five and one-half inch blade inside a black sheath and a butterfly knife with a five-inch blade.

The survival knife sheath contained a dark reddish-brown stain. The DNA profile obtained from the stain on the sheath was consistent with the research paper, DNA profile of essay for class, Stacey Reed and paper different from the job objective, DNA profile of research paper outline, Kristie Reed and Paul Powell. To My Dear And Loving. The probability of selecting an unrelated individual with a matching DNA profile at the Powerplex loci as contained on the sheath is approximately one in paper outline, 1.1 billion in the Caucasian population. After his arrest, Powell consented to several interviews with police officers. During one interview, he stated that he had been at democratic congo essay, the Reeds' home on January 29, 1999 and outline plans that Stacey was dead because “she was stupid.” Powell told the police officers that he and Stacey had an argument because she had a black boyfriend, and Powell “didn't agree with interracial dating.” Powell claimed that during the argument, Stacey attacked him and scratched his face, and then he pushed her to the floor. He claimed that Stacey attacked him again, and that she “got stuck” on his knife. Powell also initially denied raping Kristie. In a second statement to police officers, Powell admitted that he raped Kristie.

The detective who interviewed Powell testified that Powell stated that he had to kill Kristie because “she was the only witness and he would have to go to jail.” The jury was also informed that after this Court's decision in Powell's first appeal, Powell wrote two letters to the Commonwealth's Attorney of Prince William County, Paul Ebert. Below is the content of a letter that Powell wrote, dated October 21, 2001. “Since I have already been indicted on first degree murder and the Va. Supreme Court said that I can't be charged with capital murder again, I figured I would tell you the rest of what happened on Jan. 29, 1999, to show you how stupid all of y'all mother fuckers are. “Y'all should have known that there is more to the story than what I told by what I said. You had it in case study essays, writing that I planned to kill the whole family. Since I planned to kill the whole family, why would I have fought with Stacie before killing her?

She had no idea I was planning to research kill everybody and write a tma talked and carried on like usual, so I could've stabbed her up at research outline plans, any time because she was unsuspecting. “I had other plans for her before she died. You know I came back to the house after Bobby's lunch break was over and he had went back to work. When I got back, she was on vs pepsi, the phone so I went inside and I laid down on the couch. When the cab came to bring me my pager, I ran out of the house and she jumped and research plans got off the phone and came off the congo essay, porch to see why I ran out of the house like I did. “When the cab left we went in paper outline plans, the house. I laid on the couch again and she went to her room and got her clothes and went downstairs to write a tma do her laundry.

When she went downstairs, I got up and shut and locked the paper outline plans, back door and went downstairs. Case Essays. We talked while she put her clothes in the wash. Paper. We continued talking when she had everything in the wash and I reached over case study essays, and touched her tit and asked if she wanted to fuck. She said no, because she had a boyfriend. “I started arguing with her because she had never turned anybody down because of having a boyfriend. “We started walking upstairs, arguing the whole time. When we got upstairs we went to her room and she turned the radio off. After she turned the radio off I pushed her onto her bed and grabbed her wrists and pinned her hands down by her head and sat on top of research paper outline, her. Job Objective Resume. I told her that all I wanted to do was fuck her and research then I would leave and my best friend essay 8 that we could do it the easy way or the hard way. “She said she would fuck me so I got up. Research Outline. After I got up, she got up and started fighting with me and clawed me face.

We wrestled around a little and then I slammed her to the floor. When she hit the floor I sat on top of her and pinned her hands down again. She said she would fuck me and job objective resume I told her that if she tried fighting with me again, I would kill her. “When I got up she stood up and outline plans kept asking me why I was doing this and all I kept saying is take your clothes off. Finally she undid her pants and pulled them down to how to her ankles. She was getting ready to take them the research paper outline, rest of the way off and vs pepsi study essays the phone rang. When she heard the phone she pulled her pants back up and said she had to answer the phone. I pushed her back and paper outline plans said no. She said that she wouldn't say anything about me being there and I told her no and to take her clothes off. “She tried to get out how to, of the room again and I pushed her back and pulled out my knife.

I guess she thought I was just trying to scare her and that I wouldn't really stab her because she tried to leave again. “When she got to me and tried to paper outline squeeze between me and the door jam I stabbed her. A Tma. When I stabbed her, she fell back against the door jam and just looked at me with a shocked look on her face. “When I pulled the knife out she stumbled a couple steps and research paper fell in paper, her sister's room. I walked over and looked at her. I saw that she was still breathing so I stepped over her body and into the bedroom. Research Paper Outline Plans. Then I put my foot on her throat and stepped up so she couldn't breath. Job Objective Resume. Then I stepped down and started stomping on her throat.

Then I stepped back onto her throat and moved up and down putting more pressure to make it harder to breathe. “When I didn't see her breathing anymore, I left the room and got some iced tea and sat on research paper plans, the couch and smoked a cigarette. You know the rest of what happened after that point. “I would like to thank you for saving my life. I know you're probably wondering how you saved my life, so I'll tell you. “You saved my life by fucking up. There were 2 main fuck-ups you made that saved me. The first was the way you worded my capital murder indictment.

The second was the to my, comment you made in your closing argument when you said we won't know because he won't tell us. “One more time, thank you! Now y'all know everything that happened in that house at 8023 McLean St. on Jan. 29, 1999. “I guess I forgot to mention these events when I was being questioned. Ha Ha! Sike! “I knew what y'all would be able to prove in court, so I told you what you already knew. Stacey was dead and no one else was in paper, the house so I knew ya'll would never know everything she went through unless she came back to speed research paper life. “Since the Supreme Court said I can't be charged with capital murder again, I can tell you what I just told you because I no longer have to worry about the death penalty.

And y'all are supposed to be so goddamn smart. Outline. I can't believe that y'all thought I told you everything. “Well, it's too late now. Nothing you can do about it now so fuck you you fat, cocksucking, cum guzzling, gutter slut. I guess I'll see your bitch ass on Dec. 18 at trial because I'm not pleading to resume shit. Tell the family to be ready to testify and paper plans relive it all again because if I have to suffer for the next 50 or 60 years or however long then they can suffer the torment of reliving what happened for a couple of research, days. “I'm gone. Fuck you and anyone like you or that associates with people like you. Paper. I almost forgot, fuck your god, too.

Jesus knows how to suck a dick real good. Did you teach him? “Well, die a slow, painful, miserable death. See ya punk. “Do you just hate yourself for speed research being so stupid and for fuckin' up and saving me? In a statement to a police officer on research paper plans, November 2, 2001, Powell gave the following description of Stacey's murder: “She walked over to and uh I pushed her back. And then she walked over to me again I think and then I pulled my knife out and you know, and she looked at me you know. Essay. I guess she thought I wouldn't stab her or whatever. Research Paper Outline Plans. So she tried to leave and go to answer the coke, phone. That's that.

. Paper Outline. “[After she got stabbed,] [s] he just looked at my best friend for class, me for a minute you know and then you know, she . she was surprised and them um, I pulled the knife out, you know she stumbled a few steps, fell down in Christy's doorway. I just walked over and looked at paper, her. And I stepped over top of her and stepped on her throat and then stood on her throat and paper then stomped on outline plans, her throat . Job Objective Resume. then I stood on her throat until I didn't see her breathing no more. “What I'm saying I was stepping on her. I'm saying I put all my weight on her. Paper Outline. I'm saying that I put my foot there you know and then I lifted myself up to where I was standing on top of her. Write. Started stomping on paper, her throat. And then man, I just stood on her throat again until I didn't see her breathe no more.”Before he raped Kristie, Powell knew that he intended to kill her.

In response to a police officer's question: “Before you raped [Kristie], you knew you were going to kill her; didn't you?”, Powell responded: “I really didn't have a choice; did I?” While incarcerated in research, jail awaiting his capital murder trial, Powell sent a letter to Lorraine Reed, the mother of research outline, Stacey and vs pepsi study Kristie. Powell enclosed a photograph of a partially nude woman. Plans. Powell wrote: “I was wondering if you might be able to help me think of something. I found this picture in a magazine and it kinda looks like someone I know or used to know, but I can't think of the persons name.

I think you know the person too, so I was wondering if you could tell me the name of the person this picture resembles so I can quit racking my brain trying to think of it? I would appreciate it. For Class. If you don't know the research paper outline, person I'm talking about, ask Kristie or Kelly Welch because I know they know who I'm thinking of. Vs Pepsi Case. If you talk to research the person I'm talking about, please give her my address and tell her to write me.” The partially nude woman shown in the photograph resembled Lorraine Reed's daughter, Stacey. Powell wrote a letter to a friend while he was incarcerated. He stated: “About when you asked me why I wouldn't do to you what I did to Stacie, I couldn't ever hurt you because you mean to much to me. See Stacie didn't mean anything to me. She was a nigger lover and some of her wannabe skin head friends were supposed to kill me. That's part of the reason why she died.

Almost everything that happened in that house was planned. The only thing that wasn't planned was trying to fuck Kristie. What was supposed to happen was, Stacie was supposed to vs pepsi case die, and did, Kristie was supposed to paper outline die and then I was going to wait for their mom and stepdad to get home and I was going to kill them and then I was going to take their moms truck and then I was gonna go to North Carolina and knock this dude off that stole all of bradstreet and loving husband, my clothes and everything else I owned. I had been thinking about paper plans doing it for along time but I could never bring myself to do it. Democratic Congo. I don't know what happened to make me finally do it. I feel bad for doing it. Stacie was a good kid.” Powell wrote, in research outline plans, another letter: “Hey babe, what's happening?

Not too much here. I writing you to see if you could get one of job objective, your guy friends to do me a favor. You know that Kristie is telling the cops things and that she is going to testify against me in research outline plans, court. I was wondering if you could get somebody to go to a pay phone and speed paper call Kristie and tell her she better tell the cops that she lied to them and tell her she better not testify against me or she's gonna die.” Powell sent the following letter to research the Commonwealth's Attorney of Prince William County: “What's up you fat head fucker? I'm just writing to tell you, since you want to kill me so Goddamn bad for killing your nigger loving whore, set up a court date closer than Oct. 25 so I can go ahead and get this bullshit over with and plead guilty so you can kill me and get it over with, unless you want to let me out so I can kill the rest of the nigger lovers and bradstreet to my dear and loving husband all the niggers, Jews, Spics and everybody else in this fucked up country that's not white. That includes you because you are a nigger loving Jewish fucking faggot. I will see you in hell bitch.

“P.S. Watch your back!” The jury viewed writings and drawings taken from Powell's jail cell that demonstrated his hatred of research plans, people who were not Caucasian. Job Objective Resume. Additionally, the jury heard evidence that Powell told police officers that he was a racist and plans described his violent racial views. He stated, “[e]verybody that ain't white shouldn't-he needs to die.” Powell had told a police officer that he wanted to purchase a gun to a tma “[k]ill somebody. Kill a lot of outline, somebodies . [j]ust for something to vs pepsi case do.” The jury was aware of Powell's criminal record, including three convictions for research paper outline contributing to the delinquency of coke case study essays, a minor, two larceny convictions, and outline plans three felony convictions for abduction, rape, and attempted capital murder of Kristie. Powell argues that his trial counsel were ineffective and that he was prejudiced because they failed to object to the admission of the democratic, NCIC form that contained an incorrect entry that Powell had a prior conviction for capital murder. The United States Supreme Court, in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct.

2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), articulated the relevant principles that we must apply in the resolution of paper outline, Powell's claim. In Strickland, the Supreme Court stated: “A convicted defendant's claim that counsel's assistance was so defective as to require reversal of a conviction or death sentence has two components. First, the write a tma, defendant must show that counsel's performance was deficient. This requires showing that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the ‘counsel’ guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment. Second, the defendant must show that the deficient performance prejudiced the outline plans, defense. Bradstreet To My Dear Husband Essay. This requires showing that counsel's errors were so serious as to research paper outline plans deprive the defendant of a fair trial, a trial whose result is reliable.

Unless a defendant makes both showings, it cannot be said that the conviction or death sentence resulted from a breakdown in the adversary process that renders the to my dear essay, result unreliable.” Id. at 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052. Accord Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510, 534, 123 S.Ct. 2527, 156 L.Ed.2d 471 (2003); Lockhart v. Fretwell, 506 U.S. 364, 369-70, 113 S.Ct. 838, 122 L.Ed.2d 180 (1993); Lenz v. Washington, 444 F.3d 295, 302-03 (4th Cir.2006); Hedrick v. True, 443 F.3d 342, 349 (4th Cir.2006); Vinson v. Paper. True, 436 F.3d 412, 418 (4th Cir.2005).

Explaining the two-part test enunciated in Strickland, the Supreme Court noted: “An error by counsel, even if professionally unreasonable, does not warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding if the error had no effect on the judgment. Democratic Republic Essay. Cf. Research Paper Outline Plans. United States v. Morrison, 449 U.S. 361, 364-365 [101 S.Ct. 665, 66 L.Ed.2d 564] (1981). The purpose of the Sixth Amendment guarantee of friend essay for class, counsel is to plans ensure that a defendant has the assistance necessary to justify reliance on the outcome of the proceeding. Accordingly, any deficiencies in counsel's performance must be prejudicial to the defense in order to constitute ineffective assistance under the Constitution.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 691-92, 104 S.Ct. 2052.

As the Supreme Court has instructed, Powell is required to speed research establish that trial counsel's alleged error, in this instance, the failure to paper outline plans object to the admission of a tma, evidence, resulted in prejudice to paper outline plans him. The Supreme Court stated in Strickland: “[A]ctual ineffectiveness claims alleging a deficiency in attorney performance are subject to a general requirement that the defendant affirmatively prove prejudice. Even if a defendant shows that particular errors of counsel were unreasonable, therefore, the defendant must show that they actually had an adverse effect on the defense.” Id. at 693, 104 S.Ct. 2052. The Supreme Court has also held that “a court need not determine whether counsel's performance was deficient before examining the prejudice suffered by the defendant as a result of the how to write, alleged deficiencies. If it is easier to dispose of an ineffectiveness claim on the ground of lack of sufficient prejudice, which we expect will often be so, that course should be followed.” Id. at 697, 104 S.Ct. 2052. The United States Supreme Court has identified three “circumstances that are so likely to prejudice the accused that the paper plans, cost of litigating their effect in coke case, a particular case is unjustified.” United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 658, 104 S.Ct.

2039, 80 L.Ed.2d 657 (1984); Bell v. Cone, 535 U.S. 685, 695-96, 122 S.Ct. 1843, 152 L.Ed.2d 914 (2002) (“[In Cronic,] we identified three situations implicating the research paper outline plans, right to job objective counsel that involved circumstances ‘so likely to research plans prejudice the accused that the cost of litigating their effect in a particular case is unjustified.’ [ Cronic, 466 U.S. at job objective resume, 658, 104 S.Ct. 2039]”). The United States Supreme Court held that a defect is presumptively prejudicial if (1) there has been a “complete denial of counsel” at outline, “a critical stage” of the proceedings, Cronic, 466 U.S. at 659, 662, 104 S.Ct.

2039; or (2) “counsel entirely fails to subject the prosecution's case to meaningful adversarial testing,” id. at 659, 104 S.Ct. 2039; or (3) counsel is called upon to render assistance under circumstances where competent counsel very likely could not, id. at 659-62, 104 S.Ct. 2039. Democratic Essay. Bell, 535 U.S. at outline plans, 695-96, 122 S.Ct. Democratic Congo Essay. 1843. The admission of the erroneous NCIC entry does not fall into paper outline one of these enumerated categories of error when prejudice is coke vs pepsi case study so likely to result that it will be presumed. Accordingly, this Court must apply the Strickland test to determine whether the error was prejudicial. The Supreme Court's decision in Strickland applies to cases in which a habeas petitioner has been sentenced to death and in Strickland, the research, Supreme Court discussed the standard that this Court must apply to anne bradstreet and loving determine whether Powell suffered prejudice: “The defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the plans, result of the speed paper, proceeding would have been different.

A reasonable probability is plans a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome. . “When a defendant challenges a death sentence such as the one at issue in this case, the job objective resume, question is outline plans whether there is a reasonable probability that, absent the errors, the sentencer-including an appellate court, to the extent it independently reweighs the evidence-would have concluded that the balance of aggravating and mitigating circumstances did not warrant death.“In making this determination, a court hearing an job objective resume ineffectiveness claim must consider the totality of the plans, evidence before the judge or jury. Some of the factual findings will have been unaffected by the errors, and factual findings that were affected will have been affected in different ways. Some errors will have had a pervasive effect on the inferences to my best essay 8 be drawn from the evidence, altering the entire evidentiary picture, and some will have had an isolated, trivial effect. Paper Outline. Moreover, a verdict or conclusion only weakly supported by the record is more likely to bradstreet dear essay have been affected by errors than one with overwhelming record support. Taking the unaffected findings as a given, and taking due account of the effect of the errors on the remaining findings, a court making the prejudice inquiry must ask if the defendant has met the plans, burden of showing that the decision reached would reasonably likely have been different absent the errors.” Id. at 694-96, 104 S.Ct. 2052.The Supreme Court stated in Kimmelman v. Vs Pepsi Study Essays. Morrison, 477 U.S. 365, 382, 106 S.Ct. 2574, 91 L.Ed.2d 305 (1986): “As is obvious, Strickland's standard, although by no means insurmountable, is highly demanding.” Accord Fitzgerald v. Thompson, 943 F.2d 463, 468 (4th Cir.1991). As the Supreme Court directed in Strickland, we need not consider whether Powell's trial counsel's performance was deficient because we proceed directly to the issue whether Powell suffered prejudice “as a result of the alleged deficiencies.” In determining whether Powell has established that there is a reasonable probability that but for trial counsel's errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different, this Court must consider the paper plans, “totality of the evidence before the . jury.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 695, 104 S.Ct.

2052. Powell complains about trial counsel's failure to object to republic essay an entry on the bottom of page three of the NCIC form. A review of the form, which is attached to this opinion, reveals that each entry on research plans, the form contains information about a particular criminal charge. Each entry contains the name and anne bradstreet to my dear and loving husband date of the offense charged with the statutory reference, an arrest date, the jurisdiction where the offense was charged, the resulting conviction if any, a date of disposition, and various codes. Powell contends that he was prejudiced by research paper outline plans trial counsel's failure to republic essay object to research outline the entry on the bottom of page three of the form that incorrectly stated that Powell was convicted of capital murder. The erroneous entry states that even though Powell was charged with felonious assault in Prince William County on January 30, 1999, he was convicted of capital murder. This entry, which refers to speed research paper Powell's attack on Kristie Reed, erroneously contains the phrase “capital murder” when it should have contained the paper outline plans, phrase “attempted capital murder.”

When introducing the NCIC report, the Commonwealth's Attorney accurately recited Powell's criminal record: “Your honor, as an write a tma initial matter, the Commonwealth would move for the introduction of the Certified Copy of the paper plans, Defendant's prior criminal record consisting of two convictions in 1997 for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. One conviction in how to a tma, 1999 for that same crime. Research Paper Outline Plans. A petty larceny in 1998 and a grand larceny in 2001 along with the three felony convictions that is; rape, abduction with intent to defile and research paper attempted capital murder involving Kristie.” The Commonwealth's Attorney did not include the erroneous capital murder entry on the NCIC form when he summarized these crimes. Instead, he correctly related that Powell had been convicted of attempted capital murder of Kristie. No one, neither the Commonwealth's Attorney nor Powell's trial counsel, ever mentioned or suggested to the jury that Powell was convicted of a second unrelated capital murder charge. In fact, various statements made by Powell's trial counsel and the Commonwealth's Attorney informed the jury that Powell had never been convicted of an research paper outline plans unrelated capital murder charge. For example, Powell's trial counsel told the jury that Powell had been convicted of bradstreet to my and loving essay, capital murder only “one time.” None of the attorneys referenced the research, incorrect capital murder conviction on the NCIC report in speed research, their arguments to the jury.

The erroneous entry on the NCIC report indicates that Powell's attack on Kristie was originally charged as felonious assault and contains the following dates: “01/30/1999” and “01/29/1999.” The jury that sentenced Powell to death knew, however, that “01/30/1999” was the outline plans, date of Powell's arrest and “01/29/1999” was the democratic, date Powell committed the crimes against paper, Stacey and Kristie Reed. The erroneous entry refers to “Prince William Co.” and the jury knew that Prince William County was the coke case essays, location of Powell's crimes against paper, Stacey and Kristie. Thus, it is clear that the erroneous entry on paper, the NCIC form referred to paper outline plans Powell's attempted capital murder conviction concerning Kristie. Upon our review of the my best friend for class, totality of the research outline, evidence that the coke vs pepsi case study, jury considered, “[t]aking the unaffected findings as a given, and taking due account of the plans, effect of the anne and loving husband essay, errors on the remaining findings,” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 696, 104 S.Ct. 2052, we conclude that Powell has failed to demonstrate a reasonable probability that the result of the capital murder trial would have been different and hence he has not suffered prejudice as required by the highly demanding standard that the research plans, Supreme Court established in Strickland.FN* Contrary to the Supreme Court's instructions in Strickland, the dissent focuses solely upon the improperly admitted evidence and does not consider the coke vs pepsi case study, totality of the evidence before the jury. The dissent argues that we have usurped the jury's “very broad discretion” and engaged in outline plans, “speculation” by job objective resume considering the weight of the Commonwealth's evidence against research, Powell. However, in and loving, order to research paper plans perform the review mandated by Strickland, we must weigh the speed paper, evidence to determine whether there is a reasonable probability that the research outline plans, error affected the outcome of the proceedings. A Tma. Wiggins, 539 U.S. at 534, 123 S.Ct. 2527; Yarbrough v. Research. Warden, 269 Va.

184, 197-202, 609 S.E.2d 30, 38-40 (2005); Lovitt v. Write. Warden, 266 Va. 216, 250-57, 585 S.E.2d 801, 821-26 (2003). Code § 19.2-264.2 prescribes the conditions that must be satisfied before a jury can impose the sentence of death in Virginia: “In assessing the penalty of research outline, any person convicted of an coke case study offense for which the death penalty may be imposed, a sentence of death shall not be imposed unless the court or jury shall (1) after consideration of the past criminal record of convictions of the research paper outline plans, defendant, find that there is a probability that the defendant would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing serious threat to society or that his conduct in committing the offense for which he stands charged was outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible or inhuman in that it involved torture, depravity of mind or an aggravated battery to democratic republic the victim; and (2) recommend that the penalty of death be imposed.” The jury that imposed the sentence of death upon Powell concluded: “We, the jury, on the issue joined, having found the defendant, PAUL WARNER POWEL [sic], guilty of capital murder in that he did willfully, deliberately, and premeditatively kill and murder one Stacey Lynn Reed, and, having found unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt after consideration of his history and background that there is a probability that he would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing serious threat to research paper society and having found unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt that his conduct in committing the offense was outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible or inhuman in that it involved . [d]epravity of resume, mind . [a]ggravated battery to the victim beyond the minimum necessary to accomplish the act of murder [a]nd having considered all the evidence in mitigation of the offense, unanimously fixed his punishment at death.” The day before Powell committed these gruesome crimes, he went to the victims' home and outline surveyed the interior of the how to, house. He returned the next day and research plans tried to rape Stacey, who struggled with him. He stabbed her in the heart, twisted the knife, and reinserted the job objective, knife in her heart. He stomped upon her throat and he placed the entire weight of his body on her throat until she died. Next, he drank a glass of iced tea, smoked a cigarette, and waited for Stacey's younger 14-year-old sister to return home.

When Kristie arrived, Powell directed her to her sister's body, forced her downstairs into the basement, and raped her on research paper outline, the floor. Resume. He then tied her hands and feet while she was naked, choked her until she was unconscious, stabbed her in paper outline, the stomach, and slashed her neck numerous times in write a tma, an attempt to kill her. We conclude that the jury's finding that Powell's conduct was “outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible or inhuman in that it involved . [d]epravity of research paper outline, mind [and] . [a]ggravated battery to the victim beyond the minimum necessary to accomplish the act of murder” is untainted by the admission of the NCIC report and amply supported. The jury's consideration of Powell's past criminal offenses is related to coke vs pepsi case the issue of future dangerousness but has nothing to do with vileness of the act which serves as the basis of the capital offense. The instruction given to the jury on this issue and research paper the verdict form confirm that the jury was instructed to consider the defendant's criminal history only with regard to future dangerousness. For example, the jury was instructed that it could fix the punishment at death if it found: “1. That, after consideration of his history and my best friend essay 8 background, there is a probability that he would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing serious threat to society; or. “2. That his conduct in committing the paper outline, offense was outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible or inhuman, in that it involved torture, depravity of bradstreet to my dear husband essay, mind or aggravated battery to the victim beyond the minimum necessary to accomplish the act of research paper plans, murder.”

Both the instruction and the verdict form were given without objection and became the law of the case. Spencer v. Commonwealth, 240 Va. Research. 78, 89, 393 S.E.2d 609, 616 (1990). Additionally, Powell does not challenge this language in the instruction or verdict form in this habeas proceeding. We also observe that Powell's own statements provided compelling evidence of his future dangerousness.

Powell's letters and confessions to police demonstrate that he planned to kill the victims' entire family and that he continued to taunt the research, victims' family even while he was incarcerated awaiting his capital murder trial by sending the victims' mother a photograph of how to, a partially-nude woman who resembled the deceased victim. Powell also sought to outline intimidate Kristie by having another individual contact her by telephone and tell her that she would be killed if she testified against Powell. He also bragged about his desire to kill people who are non-Caucasian. As the Supreme Court instructed in essay, Strickland, “a verdict or conclusion only weakly supported by the record is more likely to have been affected by research plans errors than one with overwhelming record support.” 466 U.S. at 696, 104 S.Ct. 2052. How To Write. In Powell's case, there was “overwhelming record support” for the jury's sentencing decision. The jury's finding that Powell's crime was “outrageously or wantonly vile” was wholly unaffected by the erroneously admitted evidence. Additionally, the Commonwealth's Attorney correctly stated Powell's previous convictions, including his attempted capital murder conviction, and never emphasized or referred to research paper plans the erroneous entry. “Taking the unaffected findings as a given, and taking due account of the effect of the errors on my best for class, the remaining findings,” we hold that Powell has not “met the burden of showing that the decision reached would reasonably likely have been different absent the research paper outline, errors.” Id. Upon our review of the totality of the evidence that Powell constitutes a continuing serious threat to society and that his acts were vile in that he committed an aggravated battery to the victim beyond the minimum necessary to accomplish the act of murder, and that he demonstrated depravity of mind, we conclude that Powell failed to coke vs pepsi case study essays satisfy the plans, high standard of prejudice established by the Supreme Court's holding in Strickland.

Accordingly, we will dismiss the speed research paper, petition for research paper outline plans habeas corpus. Dismissed. Justice KEENAN, with whom Justice LACY and Justice KOONTZ join, dissenting. Justice KEENAN, with whom Justice LACY and Justice KOONTZ join, dissenting.I respectfully dissent and anne bradstreet to my dear and loving essay would hold that Powell is entitled to a new sentencing hearing. My concern is based on the incorrect evidence the jury received that Powell had been convicted of an additional capital murder committed on the same day as the present offense, when in fact he had not committed any such other offense. Research Paper Plans. I cannot imagine a more prejudicial error in friend for class 8, the admission of sentencing evidence. When a jury in this Commonwealth is asked to decide whether a defendant convicted of capital murder should live or die, the jury undertakes one of the most serious tasks that any citizen can be asked to perform. Research Paper Outline Plans. An essential component of anne and loving essay, this decision is the outline, jury's consideration of the defendant's criminal record. Under Code § 19.2-264.2, a jury must satisfy two statutory requirements before it may recommend a sentence of death.

Ultimately, the jury must find that one of the statutory aggravating factors has been proved. As an initial matter, however, the jury must consider the defendant's criminal record of convictions. Code § 19.2-264.2 requires that the case, jury analyze the outline plans, statutory aggravating factors only “after consideration of the past criminal record of convictions of the defendant.” Thus, a review of the defendant's criminal history is a prerequisite that applies regardless of which aggravating factor may finally be proved. Here, the sentencing proceedings conducted by how to the circuit court failed to comply with the first requirement of Code § 19.2-264.2, which plainly contemplates that the jury will have considered an accurate record of a defendant's criminal history before recommending that the defendant receive the death sentence. Thus, the error in this case cannot be categorized as the research paper outline plans, mere improper admission of evidence. Because of friend 8, this failure in plans, the sentencing process, the jury was unable to coke case essays perform a mandatory duty assigned by plans statute. In my opinion, the majority's holding further suffers from extensive speculation and a failure to address the broad discretion afforded a jury in making a death penalty determination. Even when a jury has determined that the Commonwealth has proved both statutory aggravating factors beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury still can recommend that the defendant serve a sentence of life imprisonment. See Code §§ 19.2-264.2, -264.4; Smith v. Commonwealth, 219 Va. 455, 472, 248 S.E.2d 135, 145 (1978); see also Tuggle v. Thompson, 57 F.3d 1356, 1371 (4th Cir.), vacated on other grounds by Tuggle v. Netherland, 516 U.S.

10, 116 S.Ct. 283, 133 L.Ed.2d 251 (1995); Briley v. Bass, 750 F.2d 1238, 1241 (4th Cir.1984). The jury may impose a sentence of life imprisonment for anne bradstreet to my dear husband any reason based on any mitigating circumstance, and is not required to weigh the evidence in mitigation against the evidence in aggravation of the crime. See Swann v. Commonwealth, 247 Va. 222, 236-37, 441 S.E.2d 195, 205 (1994); see also Tuggle, 57 F.3d at 1362. The absence of any weighing requirement is a core concept of our death penalty jurisprudence, which provides the jury the broadest possible discretion in choosing to recommend a sentence of life imprisonment or a sentence of death. Thus, the two main arguments on which the majority relies, namely, the research paper outline plans, weight of the Commonwealth's evidence against paper, Powell, and the jury's determination that the outline, Commonwealth proved both statutory aggravating factors, are not dispositive of the resume, issue before us. A jury's exercise of this very broad sentencing discretion is particularly difficult to assess under the research, Strickland test because the jury can sentence a defendant to life imprisonment even in the face of 8, overwhelming evidence in aggravation of a crime.

Nevertheless, as directed by Strickland, we must answer whether there is a reasonable probability that the jury would not have recommended a sentence of death if the jury had received accurate sentencing information. The Supreme Court provided guidance in research paper outline plans, Strickland when it defined the term “reasonable probability.” The Court stated: “A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 694, 104 S.Ct. 2052; see Lovitt v. Warden, 266 Va. 216, 250, 585 S.E.2d 801, 821 (2003); Hedrick v. Warden, 264 Va. 486, 497, 570 S.E.2d 840, 847 (2002). Bradstreet To My Dear And Loving Husband Essay. The Court has further elaborated that the reasonable probability standard is a standard lower than “more likely than not.” See Holland v. Jackson, 542 U.S. 649, 654, 124 S.Ct. 2736, 159 L.Ed.2d 683 (2004); Woodford v. Visciotti, 537 U.S.

19, 22, 123 S.Ct. 357, 154 L.Ed.2d 279 (2002). The Supreme Court's definition of the term “reasonable probability” underscores one of my major concerns in the present case. In my view, a court cannot have confidence in paper outline plans, the outcome of a death penalty determination when the court's Strickland analysis relies on speculation. Yet, here, the majority resorts to speculation in assessing the potential impact of the incorrect sentencing information. The majority opines that the jury ultimately would have been able to how to write determine that the additional capital murder conviction shown on the NCIC report was an erroneous entry. Although the majority, as skilled members of the legal profession, can easily identify this inaccuracy, the majority simply speculates that the jurors had sufficient knowledge of the law to research outline reach the job objective, same conclusion. Based on the evidence presented, the jurors could easily have viewed the NCIC report as proof that Powell committed a separate capital offense in Prince William County on the same day, brutally murdering an research paper plans additional victim. The majority also suggests that because the prosecutor did not reference the incorrect sentencing information when he summarized the contents of the NCIC report at the time of its admission into resume evidence, his oral summary of Powell's crimes would likely have resolved any confusion created by the erroneous written exhibit. The majority further relies on defense counsel's comments, noting that he indicated that Powell had been convicted of one capital murder offense.

The majority's reasoning, however, is research paper outline flawed because it requires an assumption that the jury disregarded the instructions of the friend essay 8, circuit court. In every jury trial in this Commonwealth, the court instructs the jury that the research paper, statements of counsel are not evidence in speed research paper, the case and may not be considered as such. Yet, here, the majority's holding requires a conclusion that the jury disregarded the outline, evidence appearing on the NCIC report in favor of the comments of counsel. Job Objective. Thus, the majority's rationale extends beyond simple speculation and also requires an improper conclusion that the jury rejected duly admitted evidence in favor of counsels' remarks. Because a Strickland analysis cannot rest on such speculation and improper assumptions, I am required to conclude that the research paper, jury viewed the resume, NCIC report as uncontested evidence that Powell had committed another capital murder. Paper Plans. This incorrect information went to the very heart of the sentencing determination, namely, whether the death penalty was appropriate based on the defendant's personal history and my best essay 8 the crime for which he was being sentenced. I would hold that the jury's receipt of research plans, incorrect information of such magnitude negates any reasonable confidence in the outcome of Powell's sentencing proceeding. My concerns, however, reach far beyond the congo essay, present case. In my opinion, such a serious mistake in research, a capital murder case may well cause the study, public to question whether our courts adequately ensure the fair application of our death penalty statutes. When a jury has determined that a defendant should die for the commission of a heinous murder, the public should be able to outline plans have confidence that this determination was made without fundamental errors having occurred in the sentencing process.

A central premise in support of the death penalty is vs pepsi case study that society exacts this penalty only in rare instances, and only after the penalty has been determined with full and research paper fair adherence to constitutional, statutory, and evidentiary safeguards. Because those safeguards failed in this case when a very able prosecutor made an unintentional error, I would grant a writ of job objective resume, habeas corpus limited to the award of a new sentencing proceeding. Powell v. Kelly , 562 F.3d 656 (4th Cir. 2009) (Federal Habeas). Background: Following affirmance of conviction for research paper outline plans capital murder and sentence of death, 267 Va. Research. 107, 590 S.E.2d 537, petition for writ of habeas corpus was filed. The United States District Court for research plans the Eastern District of Virginia, Thomas Selby Ellis, III, Senior District Judge, 531 F.Supp.2d 695, dismissed the petition. Petitioner appealed.

Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Shedd, Circuit Judge, held that: (1) state court's determination that Double Jeopardy Clause did not bar petitioner's prosecution was reasonable, and (2) state court's determination that defense counsel was not ineffective was not an unreasonable application of federal law. Affirmed. Gregory, Circuit Judge, filed opinion concurring in part and dear dissenting in research paper outline plans, part. SHEDD, Circuit Judge: Paul Warner Powell, a Virginia capital inmate, appeals the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. We granted a certificate of appealability (“COA”) on three issues: (1) whether the imposition of a death sentence is precluded by job objective resume the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution; (2) whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object to the admission of an inaccurate National Crime Information Center report; and (3) whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by plans failing to develop and present available mitigating evidence.

For the following reasons, we affirm. We begin with a summary of the facts pertaining to the underlying crimes, as articulated by the Supreme Court of Virginia in to my dear and loving husband essay, Powell's first direct appeal: “Powell was acquainted with Stacey Lynn Reed (“Stacey”) for two and plans a half years prior to research paper the commission of the crimes in question. Kristie Erin Reed (“Kristie”), Stacey's younger sister, described her sister and Powell as ‘[f]riends.’ Powell, who was 20 years old at the time of the murder, had wanted to date Stacey, who was 16 years old, but recognized that she was underage and he ‘could go to jail for that.’ ” “Powell, a self-avowed ‘racist and white supremacist,’ was aware that Stacey, who was white, was dating Sean Wilkerson, who is black. Wilkerson had recently moved to another locality, but he and Stacey remained in contact. Stacey was a member of research outline, her high school's Junior Reserve Officer's Training Corps and planned to research attend a military ball with Wilkerson. “Just before noon on January 29, 1999, Stacey arrived home from school early, having completed her examinations that were being given that day. Powell was waiting for paper outline her at democratic congo, her home when she arrived. When Powell learned that Robert Culver, a friend of the girls' mother, would be home shortly for lunch, Powell left and returned at about 12:45 p.m., after Culver had left. When Powell returned, he was armed with a ‘survival’ knife, a ‘butterfly’ knife, a box cutter, and a 9-millimeter pistol. “Stacey was talking to paper Wilkerson on the telephone. After Stacey ended the telephone conversation, Powell confronted her about her relationship with Wilkerson.

He demanded that Stacey end her relationship with Wilkerson. According to Powell, he and Stacey argued, and the argument grew into a struggle. Powell drew the survival knife from his belt and Stacey ‘got stuck.’ Powell denied stabbing Stacey deliberately. The struggle continued briefly until Stacey collapsed on the floor in her sister's bedroom. “Although Powell did not know whether Stacey was still alive, he made no effort to determine her condition or call for medical assistance.

Powell ‘wandered around the a tma, house, got some iced tea, had a cigarette.’ Kristie arrived home from school shortly after 3 p.m. and was met at the door of the home by Powell. Powell told her that Stacey was in her room, but moments later Kristie discovered her sister's body in research plans, Kristie's bedroom. She dropped her schoolbooks and began to cry. “Powell ordered Kristie to vs pepsi case go to the basement. Kristie, who knew that Powell was usually armed, complied because she ‘didn't want to die.’ In the outline plans, basement, Powell ordered Kristie to research paper remove her clothes and to lie on the floor. Powell then raped Kristie, and she ‘begg[ed] him not to kill her.’ Powell later admitted that he knew that Kristie, who was 14 years old at the time of the rape, had been a virgin.” “While Powell and Kristie were in paper outline plans, the basement, Mark Lewis, a friend of Kristie, came to the house and knocked on the door. When Powell heard the knock, he tied Kristie's legs together and tied her hands behind her back with shoelaces he cut from her athletic shoes. Powell then dressed and went upstairs. “While Powell was upstairs, Kristie managed to loosen the bonds on her hands and attempted to ‘scoot across the floor to hide’ under the basement steps.

Hearing Powell coming back to the basement, she returned to the position on vs pepsi study essays, the floor where he had left her. Powell then strangled Kristie with a shoelace and she lost consciousness. While she was unconscious, Powell stabbed Kristie in the abdomen and research paper plans slit her wrists and throat.” “Powell returned upstairs, searching for ‘anything worth taking.’ He fixed another glass of iced tea, which he took with him when he left the friend essay for class 8, home a short time later. Powell went to a friend's house and then drove with the friend to the District of Columbia to buy crack cocaine. “Kristie regained consciousness sometime after Powell had left her home. About 4:10 p.m., she heard Culver return home, and paper outline she called out his name.

Culver discovered Kristie in the basement, called the 911 emergency response telephone number, and began rendering first aid to her. He later discovered Stacey's body upstairs. Shortly thereafter, paramedics arrived. Bradstreet Dear And Loving Essay. In response to a question from one of them, Kristie identified Powell as her attacker. Powell was arrested later that day at the home of his friend's girlfriend, where he and the friend had gone after buying drugs. “Kristie was transported by helicopter to Inova Fairfax Hospital where she received treatment for her injuries. Paper. It was ultimately determined that the wounds to her throat and abdomen each came within one centimeter of severing a major artery which likely would have caused her death. “An autopsy revealed that Stacey had died from congo a knife wound to the heart. The medical examiner testified that there was a single entrance wound and two exit wounds indicating that the knife had been withdrawn, at least partially, and then reinserted into the heart. One wound path pierced the left ventricle and outline the other went through both the vs pepsi case, left and right ventricles, exiting the heart at the back of the right ventricle.

“Stacey's body also exhibited a number of bruises on the head, chest, abdomen, back, arms, and research paper outline legs, abrasions on the face, a stab wound to the back, and a cut and scrapes on the left forearm. The autopsy further revealed that Stacey had been struck on the head with sufficient force to cause bleeding inside her scalp and in the membranes surrounding her brain prior to death. Paper. These injuries were not consistent with Stacey merely having fallen during a struggle. “The DNA profile obtained from the outline plans, blood found on Powell's survival knife was consistent with the DNA profile of Stacey's blood. The DNA profile obtained from sperm fractions from swabs taken from Kristie's vagina and how to perianal area was the same profile as that obtained from Powell's drawn blood sample. “While in paper outline, jail, Powell wrote letters to friends in which he admitted having committed the murder, rape, and attempted murder because of Stacey's relationship with a black man. He further claimed that he had planned to kill Stacey's family and steal the family's truck. Powell also wrote to job objective a female friend and asked her to ‘get one of research plans, [her] guy friends . to go to a pay phone and call Kristie and tell her [that] she better tell the cops she lied to them and tell her [that] she better not testify against me or she's gonna die.’ “Powell told another inmate that he had become angry with Stacey when she refused to job objective resume have sex with him after talking to Wilkerson.

Powell told the inmate that he stabbed Stacey twice and that when he attempted to cut Kristie's throat, his knife was too dull, ‘[s]o he started stepping on research plans, her throat trying to stomp her throat.’ To another inmate, Powell described Stacey's killing as a ‘human sacrifice’ and expressed satisfaction in how to a tma, having raped a virgin.” Powell v. Commonwealth, 261 Va. 512, 552 S.E.2d 344, 347-348 (2001) (“ Powell I ”). B. In the original indictment, Powell was charged with a single count of capital murder in which the gradation crime was the outline plans, commission, or attempted commission, of robbery.FN1 In 2000, Powell was convicted of the capital murder of my best essay, Stacey and sentenced to death. In addition, Powell was convicted of the abduction, rape, and attempted capital murder of Kristie, and he was also convicted of grand larceny. On these non-capital convictions, Powell was sentenced to research plans three terms of life imprisonment and speed fines totaling $200,000. Powell was acquitted of research paper plans, robbery, attempted robbery, and three firearm charges. FN1. Virginia's capital murder statute includes fifteen gradation offenses, which when accompanied with the “willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing” of a person, make the resume, defendant eligible for outline the death penalty. See Va.Code § 18.2-31.

In June 2001, the Supreme Court of Virginia reversed Powell's capital murder conviction, holding that the trial judge erred by allowing a pretrial amendment of the capital murder indictment to coke study essays charge two new gradation crimes that were not considered by the grand jury. See Powell I, 552 S.E.2d at 355-56. The additional gradation crimes were the commission, or attempted commission, of paper, rape and bradstreet the commission, or attempted commission, of sodomy. The court held that including these additional counts of capital murder expanded the nature and character of the charges against Powell in research, a manner not allowed by Va.Code § 19.2-231. Id. at 357.FN2. FN2. Anne To My And Loving Husband. Va.Code § 19.2-231 allows the government to amend an indictment to correct a defect in the form of the indictment or a variance between the allegations and research outline plans the evidence offered in proof thereof, so long as the coke study essays, amendment does not change the nature or character of the offense charged.

Based on paper outline plans, the circumstances then existing, the state supreme court also concluded that there was no basis to try Powell for capital murder on remand. Id. at 363. In making this determination, the court noted that Powell had been acquitted of robbery or attempted robbery, thereby eliminating these offenses from being gradation offenses for the capital murder charge. Further, the court held that “the evidence was insufficient to support [Powell's] conviction for speed research paper the capital murder of Stacey ‘during the commission of or subsequent to’ the rape of Kristie” because the evidence clearly showed the rape of research paper, Kristie occurred after the murder of Stacey. Id. at friend for class, 361. Finally, the court noted that there was no evidence of Powell having raped or attempted to rape Stacey. Id. at outline, 363. C. While awaiting retrial and job objective resume believing that he could no longer be tried for capital murder, Powell wrote the paper outline plans, Commonwealth's Attorney and speed paper disclosed new evidence regarding the circumstances surrounding Stacey's death.

In Powell's second direct appeal, the research paper plans, Supreme Court of Virginia summarized the events as follows: FN3. FN3. For purposes of speed paper, clarity, we have omitted any footnotes within this summary that are irrelevant to the disposition of the paper, issues before us. “On October 21, 2001, Powell wrote an resume obscenity-laced letter to the Commonwealth's Attorney who had prosecuted Powell in his first trial. Powell stated in the letter that, because he believed he could not be retried for capital murder, ‘I figured I would tell you the rest of what happened on Jan.

29, 1999, to show you how stupid all y'all . are.’ Admitting that he ‘planned to kill the whole family’ on paper outline, that day, Powell further stated that ‘I had other plans for bradstreet to my dear and loving essay [Stacey] before she died.’ Powell described how he had attempted to research initiate consensual sexual intercourse with Stacey, which he had previously admitted. Powell then revealed that when Stacey resisted his advances, he pushed her onto her bed and, while sitting on top of speed, her, told Stacey ‘that we could do it the easy way or the hard way.’ “Powell then described how Stacey had ‘started fighting with me and clawed me [sic] face.’ Powell stated that he ‘slammed her to the floor . sat on research paper plans, top of her and pinned her hands down again.’ Powell claimed that Stacey relented ‘and I told her if she tried fighting with me again I would kill her.’ “Continuing, Powell stated that, at his direction, Stacey began to disrobe, but stopped when the telephone rang. Stacey put her clothes back on so that she could answer the telephone. Powell refused to allow Stacey to answer the telephone and ordered her to resume disrobing. When she refused, Powell ‘pushed her back and pulled out [his] knife.’ When Stacey attempted to leave the paper, bedroom, Powell stabbed her. Stacey fell back and Powell removed the research outline plans, knife.

Stacey then stumbled to another bedroom and collapsed. Powell ‘saw that she was still breathing’ and ‘started stomping on her throat’ until he ‘didn't see her breathing anymore.’ “Armed with this new evidence, the Commonwealth elected to nolle prosequi the indictment in the remanded case, under which it was limited to trying Powell for first degree murder under our mandate, and sought a new indictment against Powell for capital murder. On December 3, 2001, the grand jury returned an indictment charging Powell with the capital murder of ‘Stacey Lynn Reed during the commission of how to write, or subsequent to the attempted rape of Stacey Lynn Reed.’ “On April 24, 2002, Powell filed a motion to dismiss the December 3, 2001 indictment. Powell asserted that'[w]hen the Supreme Court of Virginia issues an opinion concerning a case, this opinion becomes the law of the case' and, thus, the directive of the opinion and research mandate from coke case study essays this Court in research paper plans, his first appeal limited his retrial to a charge no greater than first degree murder, regardless whether that trial was conducted under the original indictment or a new indictment. The Commonwealth filed a response to this motion, asserting that the my best for class, judgment of paper, this Court in Powell's first appeal was not applicable to the December 3, 2001 indictment because Powell had ‘never [previously] been charged with the capital murder of Stacey Reed in coke vs pepsi case study essays, the commission or attempted commission [of] sexual assault against [Stacey Reed] because, at the time of [Powell's first] trial, no such evidence existed.’ Accordingly, the outline, Commonwealth contended that the December 3, 2001 indictment was ‘a new charge, one that has never been litigated in trial nor considered by the Virginia Supreme Court. Following a hearing on this and vs pepsi study essays other pre-trial matters, the trial court overruled Powell's motion to research paper plans dismiss the indictment in an order dated May 6, 2002. “On May 17, 2002, Powell filed a second motion to dismiss the December 3, 2001 indictment. Resume. The import of Powell's argument was that his prior trial and the reversal of paper outline, his conviction by [the Supreme Court of Virginia] acted as an ‘implied’ or ‘judicial’ acquittal of the attempted rape of Stacey, thus barring his retrial for her capital murder premised on that gradation offense. The Commonwealth responded that the issue whether Stacey had been the victim of a sexual assault was not before the study, jury in his first trial because the bill of particulars provided at Powell's request indicated that only Kristie was the victim of the sexual assault gradation offenses charged in the amended indictment. Similarly, the Commonwealth contended that our comments concerning the insufficiency of the evidence to prove a sexual assault or attempted sexual assault against research paper plans, Stacey were not directed toward any finding of the jury, but to the contrary were indicative of the how to write, fact that the jury did not consider whether Stacey had been the victim of research paper outline plans, such an assault or attempt.

“On June 5, 2002, the trial court held a hearing on Powell's second motion to dismiss the my best friend essay for class 8, indictment. After hearing argument, the trial court stated that by research paper outline plans identifying Kristie as the victim of the rape or attempted rape in the bill of particulars, the Commonwealth had clearly identified her as the my best friend essay, victim of those gradation crimes in the amended indictment for capital murder. The trial court also agreed with the Commonwealth that this Court's reference to research paper plans the lack of evidence to prove any sexual assault or attempted sexual assault against Stacey was merely a comment on the record, and not an assertion that this was a theory of the case presented by speed research the Commonwealth in Powell's first trial. Research Paper Outline Plans. On July 3, 2002, the trial court entered an order overruling Powell's second motion to democratic dismiss the research paper, indictment.” Powell v. Commonwealth, 267 Va. Research Paper. 107, 590 S.E.2d 537, 544-545 (2004) (“ Powell II ”). D. In January 2003, Powell was convicted of the capital murder of Stacey during the commission of outline plans, rape or attempted rape of Stacey and sentenced to death. Coke Study. Powell appealed his conviction claiming, inter alia, that the second indictment should have been dismissed on various grounds, including the Double Jeopardy Clause. In Powell II, the outline plans, Supreme Court of how to a tma, Virginia rejected Powell's claims and research paper outline affirmed his conviction. Powell next challenged his conviction and sentence in husband essay, collateral state proceedings. See Powell v. Warden of Sussex I State Prison, No. 042716, 2005 WL 2980756 (Va.2005) (“ Powell III ”).

Powell raised numerous claims that the plans, state supreme court found were procedurally defaulted, including an allegation that the Commonwealth violated his right against double jeopardy by trying him twice for the same offense. Among the study essays, new claims Powell asserted was an objection to the admission of a National Crime Information Center report (“NCIC report”) containing inaccurate information about Powell's criminal history during sentencing and research paper outline plans a claim that his trial counsel provided him ineffective assistance by failing to how to write investigate and present compelling mitigating evidence. The Supreme Court of research outline, Virginia denied relief on all grounds. Subsequently, the my best 8, state supreme court granted rehearing on the question of whether counsel was ineffective in the sentencing phase for failing to object to the NCIC report. See Powell v. Warden of Sussex I State Prison, 272 Va.

217, 634 S.E.2d 289 (2006) (“ Powell IV ”). Outline. Ultimately, the court rejected this claim and denied Powell's petition for a new sentencing hearing. Id. Thereafter, Powell filed a petition for a writ of essays, habeas corpus in federal district court. See 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254. Powell asserted nine claims for relief. See Powell v. Kelly, 531 F.Supp.2d 695, 705 (E.D.Va.2008) (“ Powell V ”). On the research paper plans, Commonwealth's motion, the district court dismissed Powell's petition. As noted, we granted a COA on three issues: (1) whether the imposition of a death sentence is precluded by speed the Double Jeopardy Clause; (2) whether trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective in failing to object to the admission of an inaccurate NCIC report; and (3) whether trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective in failing to develop and present available mitigating evidence. Outline. We address each in turn. We review the district court's dismissal of job objective resume, Powell's petition de novo.

See Tucker v. Ozmint, 350 F.3d 433, 438 (4th Cir.2003). However, under 28 U.S.C. Paper Outline Plans. § 2254, “the scope of our review is highly constrained.” Jackson v. Johnson, 523 F.3d 273, 276 (4th Cir.2008). We may only essay 8 grant Powell relief if the state court's adjudication of his claims (1) “resulted in plans, a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by husband essay the Supreme Court of the United States,” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1); or (2) “resulted in a decision that was based on outline plans, an unreasonable determination of the vs pepsi essays, facts in light of the research, evidence presented in coke, the State court proceeding,” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(2). The “contrary to” and “unreasonable application” clauses of paper outline plans, § 2254(d) have independent meanings. Tucker, 350 F.3d at 438. A state court's decision is “contrary to” clearly established federal law under § 2254(d)(1) when it “applies a rule that contradicts the governing law set forth” by the United States Supreme Court, or “confronts a set of job objective resume, facts that are materially indistinguishable from outline plans a decision of . Case. [the Supreme] Court and nevertheless arrives at a result different from paper outline . [that] precedent,” Williams v. Coke Essays. Taylor, 529 U.S. Paper. 362, 405-06, 120 S.Ct. 1495, 146 L.Ed.2d 389 (2000). A state court's decision involves an “unreasonable application” of clearly established federal law under § 2254(d)(1) “if the state court identifies the correct governing legal rule from republic essay . [the Supreme] Court's cases but unreasonably applies it to the facts of the particular state prisoner's case.” Williams, 529 U.S. at 407, 120 S.Ct. 1495. This standard is research paper outline quite deferential: “The state court's application of clearly established federal law must be ‘objectively unreasonable,’ and ‘a federal habeas court may not issue the writ simply because that court concludes in its independent judgment that the relevant state-court decision applied clearly established federal law erroneously or incorrectly.’ ” Robinson v. Polk, 438 F.3d 350, 355 (4th Cir.2006) (quoting Williams, 529 U.S. at 411, 120 S.Ct.

1495). Moreover, when “assessing the reasonableness of the state court's application of federal law, the job objective resume, federal courts are to review the result that the state court reached, not whether [its decision] [was] well reasoned.” Wilson v. Ozmint, 352 F.3d 847, 855 (4th Cir.2003) (quotation marks omitted). Similarly, a petitioner alleging that a state court based its decision on an “unreasonable determination of the facts” under § 2254(d)(2) must satisfy a demanding standard: “The question . is not whether a federal court believes the state court's determination was incorrect but whether that determination was unreasonable-a substantially higher threshold.” Schriro v. Landrigan, 550 U.S. Outline Plans. 465, 127 S.Ct. 1933, 1939, 167 L.Ed.2d 836 (2007). Finally, § 2254(e)(1) provides that a state court's factual decisions “shall be presumed to be correct” and that the petitioner bears the burden of “rebutting the presumption of correctness by clear and convincing evidence.” 28 U.S.C § 2254(e)(1).FN4. FN4. Moreover, in cases proceeding under either § 2254(d)(1) or § 2254(d)(2), we can only grant the petitioner relief if the error had “a substantial and coke vs pepsi injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict.” Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 637, 113 S.Ct. 1710, 123 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993) (quotation marks omitted).

B. We begin with Powell's double jeopardy claim. Paper Plans. Powell asserts two arguments in job objective resume, this regard. First, he contends that the gradation offenses charged at both trials were the same-that is, he was tried for capital murder during the rape or attempted rape of Stacey in outline, both trials. Alternatively, if we decide the same offense was not charged in both trials, Powell nevertheless argues that the crime charged in the second trial had actually been litigated in the first trial, even if not formally charged. Conversely, the Commonwealth argues that the capital murder charges were different in each trial-that is, Powell was charged with the a tma, capital murder of research plans, Stacey during the rape or attempted rape of Kristie in the first trial and charged with the capital murder of Stacey during the rape or attempted rape of Stacey in the second trial. The Double Jeopardy Clause prohibits any person from being put in republic, jeopardy twice for the same offence. See U.S. Const. amend.

V. The Supreme Court held in Sanabria v. United States, 437 U.S. 54, 64, 98 S.Ct. 2170, 57 L.Ed.2d 43 (1978) (citing Ball v. Outline. United States, 163 U.S. 662, 670, 16 S.Ct. 1192, 41 L.Ed. 300 (1896)), that the Fifth Amendment prohibits subjecting a defendant to a second trial on the same offense for which he has been acquitted. In Sanabria, the Court stated that when a defendant is charged with several violations of the same criminal statute, the appropriate double jeopardy inquiry is whether the democratic essay, legislature intended the charged violations to paper outline plans be separate “allowable unit [s] of prosecution.” Id. at 70, 98 S.Ct. Bradstreet To My Dear And Loving Essay. 2170.

Stated differently for purposes of this case, the issue is whether the plans, Virginia legislature intended that a defendant could be charged with multiple counts of capital murder where there is one murder victim accompanied by multiple gradation offenses. The Supreme Court of speed research, Virginia adjudicated Powell's double jeopardy claim on research outline plans, direct appeal and rejected both of his arguments. Vs Pepsi Case. Powell II, 267 Va. 107, 590 S.E.2d 537. In analyzing Powell's first argument, the court cited its precedent holding that the General Assembly of Virginia intended that a defendant may be prosecuted for multiple violations of the Virginia capital murder statute where, as here, there is a single murder victim but different gradation crime victims. Paper Outline. Id. at how to, 553 (citing Payne v. Commonwealth, 257 Va.

216, 509 S.E.2d 293 (1999)). The state court found that the capital murder charge in the second trial alleging the murder of paper outline plans, Stacey and attempted rape of Stacey was a distinct and separate crime from the offense charged in research paper, the first trial-namely, the capital murder of Stacey during the commission of, or subsequent to, Powell's rape of research outline plans, Kristie. The court concluded that Powell's second capital murder trial was not barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause. As to Powell's first argument, we hold that the case study essays, Virginia Supreme Court's decision was consistent with Supreme Court precedent and was not an unreasonable application of federal law. The analysis that the state court conducted was precisely the analysis Sanabria mandates. Therefore, the decision was not contrary to clearly established federal law. Paper. Further, the court's determination was not an unreasonable application of the Supreme Court's clearly established precedent. Sanabria requires a court to determine whether the legislature intended to allow multiple charges under the statute. In this case, the Virginia Supreme Court decided that under Virginia law, a defendant can be charged for multiple capital murder counts where there is a single murder victim accompanied by multiple gradation offenses.

Id. Thus, the republic congo, state court did not apply the Supreme Court's precedents to the facts in an objectively unreasonable manner. The Virginia Supreme Court also rejected Powell's alternative double jeopardy argument that the paper plans, attempted rape of Stacey charged in the second trial had already been litigated in the first trial. The court relied on speed, settled state law that Stacey's attempted rape was not at issue in research, the first trial because the Commonwealth's bill of particulars limited the first trial solely to the capital murder of Stacey subsequent to, or in resume, the commission of, the rape of paper outline, Kristie. See Powell II, 590 S.E.2d at 554 (holding that “by naming a specific victim of the gradation offense in a bill of particulars, jeopardy will attach only to the capital murder charge as made specific by the bill of particulars”).FN5 In reaching this result, the court followed its precedent holding that “the bill of particulars and the indictment must be read together” as specifying the crime charged. See Livingston v. Commonwealth, 184 Va. 830, 36 S.E.2d 561, 565 (1946). The court recognized that the essay, original indictment in the first trial did not identify the name of the victim of the gradation offense. Research Plans. However, upon Powell's request, the how to write, Commonwealth specified in a bill of particulars that the charged offense only involved Kristie as the victim of the gradation offense. Thus, the court concluded that Powell was only tried in the first trial for the capital murder of Stacey during the commission of, or subsequent to, the rape of Kristie. See Powell II, 267 Va.

107, 590 S.E.2d 537. Based on research paper outline plans, established state law principles, the democratic republic congo, court ruled that Powell's second trial was not a double jeopardy violation because the indictment in the second trial charged a crime not charged in the first trial. FN5. A defendant does not have a right to a bill of research paper plans, particulars in Virginia. See Quesinberry v. Commonwealth, 241 Va. 364, 402 S.E.2d 218, 223 (1991) (holding whether the Commonwealth is coke case study essays required to file a bill of particulars lies within the research outline plans, discretion of the bradstreet dear, trial court). Further, there is research outline plans no federal constitutional right to a bill of resume, particulars.

See United States v. Bales, 813 F.2d 1289 (4th Cir.1987) (internal citations omitted). The purpose of a bill of particulars is “to state sufficient facts regarding the crime to inform an accused in advance of the offense for which he is to be tried.” Quesinberry, 402 S.E.2d at 223 (citing Hevener v. Commonwealth, 189 Va. 802, 54 S.E.2d 893, 899 (1949)). Importantly, at the time Powell requested a bill of particulars, he was the outline, only person who knew that the unidentified gradation victim could be either Stacey or Kristie. Thus, he benefitted from the Commonwealth informing him that Kristie was the write, victim of the paper, gradation offense in preparing his defense. How To Write. Finally, in a jury trial, jeopardy attaches when a jury is empanelled and sworn. Serfass v. United States, 420 U.S. 377, 388, 95 S.Ct.

1055, 43 L.Ed.2d 265 (1975) (citing Downum v. United States, 372 U.S. 734, 83 S.Ct. 1033, 10 L.Ed.2d 100 (1963)). It is clear that at the time the jury was sworn in Powell's first trial, Powell was only in jeopardy, so far as is relevant here, for the murder of Stacey during the rape of Kristie as specified by the bill of particulars. Powell argues that this holding was an research outline unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented at trial.

He claims, among other arguments, that the bill of anne dear husband, particulars did not limit the charge because the jury heard argument from the prosecutor that Powell “wanted something more” from Stacey, the paper outline, jury heard testimony from witnesses suggesting that Stacey refused to my best essay for class have sex with Powell, and the jury was not told about the limitation of the bill of particulars. Powell's argument falls short of showing an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented. First, under settled Virginia precedent, the court determined that, as a matter of state law, Powell was not charged with the attempted rape of Stacey in the first trial. Second, because Powell “wanted something more” does not mean that Powell attempted to rape Stacey. It is research paper entirely plausible that “wanted something more” meant only that Powell wanted a sexual relationship with Stacey, but she was uninterested. This is a tma not a basis for research paper outline a charge of attempted rape. Finally, there was testimony in the first trial that Stacey had refused to speed have sex with Powell. Again, rejecting sexual advances, without more, is not evidence of an outline plans attempted rape.

The evidence of bradstreet dear and loving essay, Powell attempting to rape Stacey after her refusals only came to light after the research outline plans, first trial was over. If the coke, Commonwealth had been prosecuting Powell for this gradation offense, it would not have restricted the bill of particulars to identifying only Kristie as the victim of the gradation offense. Clearly, the research paper outline plans, state court's determination that the charge that Powell had attempted to rape Stacey was not litigated in the first trial was not an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented. FN6 Accordingly, we find no error in the state court's application of federal law.FN7. FN6. The dissent's criticism of our decision rests on a misunderstanding of the facts of this case. When one reviews the record of the first trial it becomes clear that no one involved litigated as though Powell was being tried for murder during the rape or attempted rape of Stacey. The Commonwealth certainly did not offer evidence on that purported charge during that trial. Moreover, the bill of particulars unambiguously identified Kristie only research paper as the victim of the rape or attempted rape, and Powell's trial counsel clearly recognized this fact as evidenced by their comments to the court and to the jury. See, e.g., Record, Vol.

2, at 1068 (“The rape involved Kristi[e], not Stac[ey]”); Record, Vol. 2, at plans, 1052 (“Stac[ey] is the victim or alleged victim on the capital murder, the for class 8, robbery, and the attempted robbery. Research Paper. And . Kristi[e] the victim or alleged victim on rape . ”); Record, Vol. Resume. 2, at 995 (“and on the rape allegation, obviously, Kristi[e] Reed”); Record, Vol. 2, at 935 (“I might also add in the Bill of Particulars that Your Honor ordered, the Government identified the victim of the alleged rape and attempted rape . as being Kristie, not Stac[ey], but Kristie”). The trial judge likewise recognized this fact. For example, the trial judge instructed the research paper plans, jury that “[s]exual intercourse means an actual penetration, no matter how slight, of the Defendant's penis into the sexual organ of coke essays, Kristi[e] Reed.” Record, Vol. 2, at 1024-25. Although the research paper, dissent contends that the trial judge's response to the jury question suggests that he was confused as to the identity of the rape victim, the proceedings that followed the 8, receipt of the question demonstrate that the judge was not confused on that point. Research Outline Plans. It is clear that the trial judge was not concerned with who the victim of the rape was; instead, he was concerned with the timing of the rape of Kristie and whether the speed, murder of Stacey could be found to have occurred “subsequent to” or “during the research paper, commission of” the democratic congo, rape of Kristie.

See J.A. 53-55, 62. FN7. Related to his double jeopardy claim, Powell argues that his second trial is barred by principles of collateral estoppel. See Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 443, 90 S.Ct. 1189, 25 L.Ed.2d 469 (1970). Although the state argues this claim is research procedurally defaulted, we find that it lacks merit in any event.

For substantially the vs pepsi essays, reasons given by the district court, we affirm the dismissal of this claim. See Powell V, 531 F.Supp.2d at 724-25. C. Research Paper Plans. We next turn to Powell's claim that his trial counsel was ineffective in not objecting to the admission of the how to write, NCIC report. The report incorrectly stated that Powell had been convicted of capital murder and referenced a pending capital murder charge, presumably the charge for which Powell was standing trial. Research Outline. Finally, the report contained correct entries that Powell asserts were inadmissible at trial, such as charges that were nolle prossed or for my best friend for class 8 which Powell was found not guilty. In Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), the Supreme Court articulated the relevant standard for a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel: A convicted defendant's claim that counsel's assistance was so defective as to require reversal of a conviction or death sentence has two components.

First, the defendant must show that counsel's performance was deficient. This requires showing that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the ‘counsel’ guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment. Second, the defendant must show that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense. This requires showing that counsel's errors were so serious as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial, a trial whose result is research outline reliable. Unless a defendant makes both showings, it cannot be said that the conviction or death sentence resulted from a breakdown in how to a tma, the adversary process that renders the result unreliable. Id. at 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052. The Supreme Court of Virginia found, in its first opinion denying Powell's state habeas petition, that there was a single capital murder conviction entry listed on paper outline plans, the NCIC report. Powell III, 2005 WL 2980756, at 14. The court determined this entry referenced Powell's first conviction for the capital murder of Stacey, which was reversed in Powell's first direct appeal.

Id. Powell petitioned the court for republic rehearing on this issue and the court granted his motion. See Powell IV, 272 Va. 217, 634 S.E.2d 289. On rehearing, the court found that there was an additional incorrect capital murder conviction entry in the NCIC report that referred to research Powell's conviction for the attempted capital murder of Kristie.

After acknowledging these errors, the court found that there was no valid claim for ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland because Powell could not demonstrate prejudice. Id. at 299, 272 Va. 217. Powell contends that the state court's interpretation of the friend essay for class 8, inaccuracies in the report is itself error because the court's determinations of what the state capital convictions actually meant was based on speculation. However, Powell's arguments fails.

We must presume the outline plans, correctness of a state court's factual determination unless the habeas petitioner rebuts the presumption of correctness by how to write a tma clear and convincing evidence. 28 U.S.C. Outline Plans. § 2254(e)(1). Powell has offered no clear and convincing evidence to speed paper rebut the presumption of correctness that we afford the state court's factual findings. Next, Powell contends that the state court unreasonably applied Strickland because he has shown that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to object to the NCIC report. We disagree.

Under Strickland, Powell must show that “there is a reasonable probability that, absent the errors, the sentencer . Plans. would have concluded that the balance of aggravating and mitigating circumstances did not warrant death.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 695, 104 S.Ct. Democratic Congo Essay. 2052. Stated differently, Powell can show prejudice and is entitled to research plans relief only if he can show that had the NCIC report not been admitted, “there is a reasonable probability that at least one juror would have struck a different balance.” Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510, 537, 123 S.Ct. Write. 2527, 156 L.Ed.2d 471 (2003).

Absent this showing, Powell is not entitled to relief. The Supreme Court of Virginia's analysis was not objectively unreasonable. The court listed the overwhelming evidence presented to the jury that demonstrated Powell's future dangerousness. This evidence included, inter alia: 1) the heinous details of the crimes; 2) the letter Powell wrote to paper the prosecutor following the first trial divulging of the circumstances of Stacey's attempted rape and death; 3) a taunting letter Powell wrote to Stacey's mother; FN8 4) another letter Powell wrote to the Commonwealth's Attorney stating that he wanted to get out of prison to job objective “kill . everybody else in this f[* *]ked up country that's not white;” 5) a letter Powell wrote asking a friend to research paper threaten Kristie; and 6) Powell's admission to police that he wanted to “[k]ill a lot of and loving essay, somebodies . [j]ust for something to do.” See Powell IV, 634 S.E.2d at 290-94. The court also pointed out that the Commonwealth's attorney relied very little on Powell's criminal history in arguing future dangerousness.

See Id. at 297, 272 Va. 217. Research Paper. The prosecutor correctly summarized Powell's prior convictions and never suggested that Powell had been convicted of other capital murder charges. FN8. While incarcerated, Powell sent a letter to Lorraine Reed, the mother of Stacey and Kristie.

Powell enclosed a photograph of a woman who resembled Stacey and who was naked from the my best friend for class 8, waist up. Among other things, Powell asked Lorraine for her help in identifying who the woman in the picture resembled, directed Lorraine to ask Kristie for research paper plans help if she could not determine who it resembled, and asked Lorraine to coke case essays give his address to the person about whom he was referring. The state court balanced the research outline plans, aggravating evidence against the limited use of the NCIC report and noted that “a verdict or conclusion only weakly supported by how to a tma the record is more likely to have been affected by errors than one with overwhelming record support.” Id. at 298, 272 Va. 217 citing Strickland, 466 U.S. at 696, 104 S.Ct. 2052. The court then concluded that, in light of the overwhelming aggravating evidence of Powell's future dangerousness, Powell had not shown that “but for” the admission of the NCIC report, at least one juror would have chosen not to sentence him to death. Thus, Powell had not shown that any alleged deficiency by trial counsel had affected the outcome of his sentence. Powell's ineffective assistance of research paper plans, counsel claim fails.

The state court properly applied Strickland to the facts of this case. First, it is reasonable to to my dear and loving believe the jury understood Powell had not previously been convicted of the research plans, capital murder of vs pepsi case study essays, two other victims in addition to Stacey. The jury knew Powell's previous conviction of the capital murder of Stacey had been successfully appealed and vacated based on the contents of Powell's letter to the Commonwealth's attorney. Further, Powell's own attorney made statements that Powell had successfully appealed a capital murder conviction. The jury was aware of the crimes that had been committed against Kristie, including the resulting attempted capital murder conviction. See id. Thus, it is reasonable that the jury, upon seeing the two entries for capital murder, would understand that the NCIC report's entries were inaccurate and actually referred to the attempted capital murder of research outline plans, Kristie and the vacated conviction for the capital murder of Stacey.

In sum, Powell has failed to meet his burden to show the unreasonableness of the how to write a tma, state court's determinations. We conclude that the state court's determination that Powell had not shown prejudice is not an unreasonable application of Supreme Court precedent or based on research outline plans, an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented at friend essay for class 8, trial. Therefore, we affirm the paper outline, dismissal of this claim.FN9. FN9. Powell asserts three other reasons that the state court unreasonably applied federal law.

First, Powell argues the state court failed to consider the totality of the evidence in performing its prejudice analysis. Second, Powell argues the state court improperly relied on job objective resume, the existence of an “untainted” aggravating factor to support the death sentence when the court explained that Powell's criminal history “has nothing to do with” vileness. We have reviewed the record in this regard and find no basis for relief. Finally, Powell argues that the state court unreasonably applied Strickland by research outline plans using an improperly elevated standard of resume, prejudice. Paper. The state court described Strickland's standard as “highly demanding.” Powell IV, 634 S.E.2d at 296 quoting Kimmelman v. Morrison, 477 U.S. 365, 382, 106 S.Ct. To My Dear Essay. 2574, 91 L.Ed.2d 305 (1986). Powell's argument in this regard is not persuasive. In reviewing the state court's opinion, it is clear that it did not require a more demanding showing under Strickland; rather, the court was simply commenting that the standard was high and Powell had not met it.

We now turn to Powell's final claim that his trial counsel was ineffective by failing to investigate and present all reasonably available mitigating evidence. Paper Outline Plans. Powell contends that there was compelling mitigation evidence to counter the Commonwealth's evidence of aggravation. Powell maintains that counsel failed to counter the Commonwealth's arguments that, inter alia, he: held racist beliefs and tortured animals; was inherently violent; had no remorse; and vs pepsi case study was of above average intelligence. Generally, Powell contends that counsel was ineffective in failing to research paper plans offer the congo essay, following evidence: that Powell made racist statements for their shock value on listeners, rather than as expressions of true beliefs; that he was actually kind to animals; that he had never been inherently violent; that numerous persons witnessed him showing serious remorse for his crime; and research paper that he is not of above average intelligence. It is well-established that an individual claiming ineffective assistance of counsel must show, first, that counsel's performance was deficient, in that it “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 688, 104 S.Ct. 2052. Once counsel conducts a reasonable investigation of law and facts in a particular case, his strategic decisions are “virtually unchallengeable.” Id. at 690, 104 S.Ct.

2052. Tactical or reasonable professional judgments are not deficient but a failure to coke vs pepsi case study investigate a material matter due to inattention may be deficient. Research Paper Outline. When the claim is coke vs pepsi case essays that counsel failed to paper outline plans present a sufficient mitigating case during sentencing, the inquiry “is not whether counsel should have presented a mitigation case” but “whether the investigation supporting counsel's decision not to introduce mitigating evidence . Anne Bradstreet Dear And Loving Husband. was itself reasonable.” See Wiggins, 539 U.S. at 523, 123 S.Ct. 2527 (internal citations omitted). The Supreme Court of Virginia properly analyzed this claim under Strickland. Research Paper Plans. Therefore, our review is limited to whether the state court's application of federal law was unreasonable. The Supreme Court of Virginia examined each claim and properly made a determination under Strickland of whether Powell had shown deficiency of counsel's performance and prejudice. We have examined each of Powell's contentions and find that the state court's determinations were not an unreasonable application of Strickland. Therefore, we affirm the anne dear husband essay, dismissal of research paper outline plans, this claim.

Based on the foregoing, we affirm the district court's order denying Powell's habeas petition. AFFIRMED GREGORY, Circuit Judge, concurring in part and dissenting in part:I concur with the reasoning of the majority's opinion on Powell's ineffective assistance of coke, counsel claims. However, I find nothing reasonable about the Supreme Court of Virginia's finding in Powell II that the bill of particulars nullified the Commonwealth's conduct at outline, Powell's first trial. This conduct unquestionably put him in jeopardy for the attempted rape of Stacey Reed. Even taking into account the resume, nearly insurmountable burden placed on outline, Powell by virtue of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”), I am left with the firm conclusion that the Supreme Court of Virginia's post-hoc rationalization in Powell II is an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented, and thus Powell's conviction for capital murder must be reversed. The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that no “person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in resume, jeopardy of life or limb.” There can be no doubt that Powell was actually put in jeopardy for the gradation offense of the attempted rape of Stacey during the research plans, first trial, and thus his second capital murder trial violated the Double Jeopardy Clause. Although the bill of particulars purportedly identified Kristie Reed as the my best, victim of the gradation offense, the Commonwealth nevertheless argued throughout the first trial that Powell attempted to outline plans rape Stacey prior to coke vs pepsi case study essays her murder.

In the research paper, Commonwealth's opening argument, counsel stated: Stacie [sic], the older girl, knew the Defendant, had met him sometime before. They had a friendship, a social acquaintance. You'll hear evidence that he wanted more from her than that. Research Paper. You'll hear evidence that she was cool towards him. . And on the afternoon of the research paper outline plans, 29th, there was nobody home with Stacie [sic] when he came over and they argued about this boy that she was dating. And he wanted something from her and speed she wasn't going to give it to him and for that she lost her life. (J.A. 24-25 (emphasis added).) During the trial, the Commonwealth put on circumstantial evidence suggesting that Powell had attempted to rape Stacey, and even argued as much to the trial court. In response to Powell's motion to strike the indictment for insufficiency of the research paper outline plans, evidence, counsel argued that.

[W]e have evidence here, again, from Mr. Neff that according to him [Powell] was having sex or attempting to have sex with Stacie [sic] when the phone rang. When she got up and answered the phone, then she wanted nothing to speed paper do with him, and at that point in time he got mad and said-the testimony was, he said, “It was that nigger, wasn't it?” He pulled out his knife and stabbed her. Again, evidence, in that regard of research paper outline, his intent to rape and have sex and resume wanting sex. (J.A. 43 (emphasis added).) Furthermore, the Commonwealth elicited testimony from Officer Daigneau, who testified that a physical evidence recovery kit had been obtained from Stacey and such kits are “routinely done in outline, cases of sexual assault.” (J.A. 29; see also J.A. 29-31.)

Tellingly, at no time during the trial did the 8, Commonwealth ever specifically identify Kristie as the paper plans, victim of the gradation offense.FN1 Nor did the coke vs pepsi essays, trial court make any attempt to clarify that the bill of particulars identified Kristie as the victim of the gradation offense. In its instructions to paper the jury, the anne to my dear and loving, trial court stated that. FN1. While the majority points out that the evidence presented by the Commonwealth during the first trial was “not a basis for a charge of attempted rape” (Maj.Op. 667), that analysis conflates the issue of whether an individual was put in jeopardy for an offense with the issue of whether the outline, prosecution put on sufficient evidence to convict an speed individual for paper that offense. The Commonwealth did not fail to prosecute Powell for the attempted rape of Stacey, it just failed to do so successfully, and the majority misses that point in anne dear husband essay, its analysis. [t]he Commonwealth must prove beyond a reasonable doubt each of the paper plans, following elements of that crime:1. How To Write. That the defendant killed Stacie [sic] Reed; and.

2. That the research paper, killing was willful, deliberate and premeditated; and. 3. That the killing occurred during the to my dear and loving husband, commission of robbery and/or attempted robbery and/or during the commission of, or subsequent to rape. (J.A. 59 (emphasis added).) With regard to first-degree murder, the trial court gave similarly broad instructions:If you find from the evidence that the Commonwealth has failed to prove that the killing was deliberate and paper outline premeditated, but the bradstreet husband essay, killing was willfully committed during the commission of robbery or attempted robbery and/or rape or attempted rape, you shall find the defendant guilty of first degree murder. (J.A. 60 (emphasis added).) Given the lack of specificity in the jury instructions, it is not surprising that during deliberations the jury asked: “Can a guilty verdict for the rape of outline plans, Kristie be used to satisfy jury instruction number 4, element 3?” FN2FN2.

In fact, the job objective resume, trial judge initially indicated that the research paper plans, answer to this question was “no.” (J.A. 53.) Such an answer would only make sense if the judge thought that the attempted rape of Stacey would satisfy the republic, requirement of the gradation offense and paper outline that the jury could convict Powell of that offense. Resume. (J.A. 62.) The fact that the jury needed to ask this question demonstrates that the outline, jury was unaware that the bill of particulars identified Kristie as the sole victim of the gradation offense, and it further implies that the jury was considering the coke study essays, rape or attempted rape of both Stacey and Kristie in reaching its verdict. On appeal, the Supreme Court of plans, Virginia itself recognized that Powell had been put in jeopardy for the rape or attempted rape of Stacey, and my best friend 8 indeed based its decision in part on that finding. See Powell I, 552 S.E.2d at 363. After reversing Powell's capital murder conviction because the indictment had been improperly amended, the court continued: [W]e now further determine that there is no basis upon which Powell can be retried for capital murder on remand. The poll of the jury establishes that Powell was acquitted of the charge of capital murder in the commission of robbery or attempted robbery.

It is plans equally clear that there is simply no evidence upon paper, which the jury could have relied to find that Powell committed or attempted to commit any sexual assault against Stacey before or during her murder, or that the rape of Kristie did not occur after the research outline plans, murder of her sister. For these reasons, we will reverse Powell's conviction for capital murder, affirm his convictions for abduction, rape, attempted capital murder, and grand larceny, and remand the case for a new trial on coke vs pepsi case, a charge of no greater than first degree murder for the killing of research outline, Stacey Reed, if the democratic republic congo, Commonwealth be so advised. Id. (emphasis added). It is perplexing that the Supreme Court of Virginia would have made such a finding if, in fact, the rape or attempted rape of Stacey had not been litigated in the first trial. In affirming Powell's capital murder conviction in research paper plans, Powell II, however, the Supreme Court of Virginia reversed course. The court characterized its earlier references to the sexual assault of Stacey as merely “ ‘the circumstances of friend essay, this case’ ” as they existed at the time of the first trial, 590 S.E.2d at 552 (quoting Powell I, 552 S.E.2d at 363).

This recharacterization is unreasonable in light of the proceedings in the first trial. At every turn, the Commonwealth, the trial court, the jury, and even the Supreme Court of Virginia acted as though Powell were on trial for the murder of Stacey in the commission of research outline plans, any rape or attempted rape, and not specifically on trial for the murder of Stacey in case, the commission of the rape of Kristie. Like the Supreme Court of Virginia, the majority claims that “no one involved litigated as though Powell was being tried for murder during the rape or attempted rape of research plans, Stacey.” (Maj. Op. 667 n. 6.) Yet, the majority provides no explanation for why the democratic congo, Commonwealth elicited testimony that police officers performed a physical evidence recovery kit on Stacey or made intimations that Powell attempted to research outline sexually assault Stacey. ( See J.A. 29, 24-25.) These actions demonstrate that the Commonwealth did litigate as if Powell were on how to write, trial for outline the murder of Stacey in the commission of democratic republic congo essay, her rape or attempted rape. In further support of paper, its finding that Powell had not already been put in jeopardy for the rape or attempted rape of Stacey, the Supreme Court of Virginia found that the congo, bill of particulars served to narrow the offense of jeopardy to include only the rape of Kristie: [W]here, prior to the attachment of jeopardy, the Commonwealth limits the prosecution of a capital murder, undifferentiated in outline, the indictment by the identity of the victim of the gradation offense, by naming a specific victim of the gradation offense in a bill of particulars, jeopardy will attach only to the capital murder charge as made specific by for class the bill of particulars. Powell II, 590 S.E.2d at 554. Research Plans. The majority now relies on this holding in finding that the job objective, Supreme Court of Virginia committed no reversible error in its application of federal law. Research Outline. ( See Maj. Op.

665-67.) Even assuming that this holding is not unreasonable as a matter of law, it overlooks the fact that the Commonwealth did not actually limit its prosecution for capital murder to essay the rape of Kristie. Plans. Moreover, neither the prosecution nor the speed paper, trial court ever specified to the jury that the bill of particulars identified Kristie as the victim of the gradation offense. Had the trial court excluded evidence suggesting that Powell had attempted to rape Stacey or clarified that the paper, attempted rape of Stacey could not satisfy the requirements of the gradation offense, the Commonwealth would have a stronger argument that the bill of particulars had a limiting effect-but that is not the case here. Instead, the how to a tma, bill of particulars operated as a double-edged sword for research outline Powell: on one hand, the anne bradstreet dear husband essay, Commonwealth ignored its import in putting on circumstantial evidence suggesting that Powell had sexually assaulted Stacey before her murder, while on research paper, the other hand the Commonwealth was able to use the bill of research, particulars as a safety valve to later retry Powell for research outline capital murder when new evidence came to light. Notwithstanding the above analysis, the majority concludes that the rape or attempted rape of Stacey was somehow not litigated because Powell's trial counsel “clearly recognized” the limiting effect of the job objective, bill of particulars, “as evidenced by their comments to the court and to the jury.” (Maj. Op.

667 n. 6.) Again, the research plans, majority misses the point. I agree that Powell's trial counsel understood that the bill of particulars should limit the prosecution of the vs pepsi study essays, gradation offense. Indeed, Powell's trial counsel submitted proposed jury instructions specifying that Kristie was the victim of the gradation offense. Research Paper. (R. Vs Pepsi Study Essays. vol. 21 at 1213.) The problem is paper that despite counsel's exhortations, the my best friend essay for class, trial court did not use the proposed jury instructions or otherwise clarify this point to the jury. Finally, the majority contends that the trial judge impliedly recognized the effect of the bill of particulars when he instructed the jury that “[s]exual intercourse means an actual penetration, no matter how slight, of the paper outline, Defendant's penis into democratic republic congo essay the sexual organ of Kristi[e] Reed.” (R. vol. 20 at 1024-25.) But the majority takes this instruction out of research outline plans, context.

Along with capital murder, Powell was charged with the rape of Kristie. It was in instructing the jury on bradstreet to my dear husband, this latter charge that the trial judge used the phrase “sexual intercourse.” FN3 (R. vol. 20 at 1020.) Thus, when the trial judge clarified the definition of sexual intercourse, it was for the purposes of the rape charge, which specified Kristie as the victim, and not the capital murder charge, which did not specify Kristie as the research outline plans, victim.

How to buy essay cheap with no worries -
Research Paper Outline

Management Consulting Resume Sample. In order to reach your goal of becoming a management consultant, you need to strike a tone in your resume. In one of the most competitive fields in the working world, breaking into management consulting requires substantial work and a perfect resume. Recruiters assume that your management consulting resume is an accurate representation of who you are. If it’s too superficial and commonplace, it might suggest that you won’t be able to paper plans make a valuable contribution to the consulting firm and my best, your resume will therefore be put aside after a short assessment. Breaking into management consulting is a serious goal and research paper plans, you have to how to craft your resume with quality, value and uniqueness. It must be effective enough to pique the interest of the recruiters and convince them to schedule you for testing, interviews, and other assessments. Before Writing: Know Your Target Firm. Before you turn on the computer and start typing, allot some time to investigate your target firm.

Your knowledge will guide you in writing your management consulting resume; it will help you build a connection between you and your potential employer and enable you to construct a unique and personalized marketing tool. Below are some techniques on how to research paper plans do this: How do these activities distinctly help you tailor your resume? First, you will be able to democratic republic congo essay phrase your resume so it resonates with the individual company. Two firms may have the same values, stated in different terms.

Alternate the terms in your resume to correspond with each firm you apply with. Moreover, you can emphasize content based on an individual firm’s goals. Paper Plans? For instance, if a particular firm values leadership, it’s wise to list previous work experience and accomplishments highlighting your achievements in this area. Your cover letter serves as a knock at the consulting firm’s door. It may be key to your invitation to job objective interview, but your resume deepens the picture your resume reviewer gets of your experience and background. The reviewer will probably only plans, look at this document for a short time. Bradstreet To My And Loving Essay? All consulting firms receive many applications – this includes both boutique consulting firms as well as top tier consulting firms such as McKinsey, Bain, Boston Consulting Group and Booz. Therefore, your management consulting resume needs to provide high impact and be of a high quality.

The key is preparation and outline work before you get started with the writing process. Go through the full resume preparation and planning process. Research Outline? Craft a structure of your resume by brainstorming about your educational, work and volunteer (or other relevant) experiences and listing them. From there, start to how to narrow down the experience that is paper, pertinent to your desired career path. Resume? Then come up with something like our resume outline (as shown below). This outline is our suggestion, based on our experience with successful management consulting applications. You can, however, use a structure that best highlights your experience in the most compelling way for outline, you. The most important point is to offer clarity and strong, action-oriented results and achievement descriptions.

Parts of Your Management Consulting Resume. Management consulting resumes can be organized in many different ways, and many follow a pattern similar to the diagram shown. The way you choose to organize it will depend on several factors. To My Dear And Loving Essay? Your personal experience and what you want to emphasize in your resume will come into play. New graduates will probably place greater emphasis on education, academic performance and involvement in relevant extracurricular activities and internships. Paper? Experienced consultants will rely heavily on professional experience and skills. Some of what you write may depend on the firm to which you are applying. Some firms have preferences about what you should highlight in your resume. Tailor your management consulting resume to follow any guidance you have about what the firm wants to see. Edit and revise your resume multiple times in the process. Tailor and bradstreet, virtually rewrite it for each new application.

Your resume is research paper outline, a living document that changes as you gain more experience but also when you apply for different positions. This is the section where you will provide basic information about anne and loving husband, yourself. It may sound easy, but here are a few techniques and reminders you may find useful: A summary is a brief statement of your major qualifications, expertise, and experience; an paper outline plans, objective refers to your career goals and democratic essay, motivation. The former is often utilized by applicants with professional experience, while recent graduates employ the latter. When you write this section, make sure that: It is written concisely but substantially. It should not exceed two to research paper outline plans three sentences. It must be related to the desired position and target firm. Resume? It must be catchy enough to encourage the recruiters to read the rest of your management consulting resume.

Here’s an example of a summary: Here’s an example of an objective: Here’s an example of a longer summary: A key consideration when you write about your professional experience is to measure whether or not it is research paper plans, relevant. Is the to my and loving husband essay, experience you list directly relevant to the desired position? Activities that are unnecessary to your career path only waste the plans, limited space you have to make your case for anne to my dear and loving husband, being hired. It adds nothing and erases prime “application real estate”.

For every position you mention, describe your key responsibilities, followed by quantifiable accomplishments in research paper outline, bullet form. Hiring managers want results first and foremost. Use powerful terms such as verbs and numbers—they make your statements more results-oriented. Some of the democratic, suggested action words are listed in the table below: Management consulting resume for experienced professionals would most probably state the experience section this way: Executive Vice President, B2B Sales and MarketingManaged a team of research outline, 65 sales and marketing executives in a B2B sales structure. Guided product sales and marketing development efforts and managed sales operations.

Led expansion to Southeast Asian market and selected and managed a sales team for developing Asian operations. Increased annual revenue by 22 percent year over year over three years. Coke Vs Pepsi Study Essays? Expanded market for research, software products from Europe to North America and Asia and increased sales by 27%. Increased annual revenue by 1.3 million USD and achieved profitability and market share. Here’s an example for resume, fresh graduates: Project Analyst, Internship Program, STU Consulting Firm, August – September 2012.

Assisted a team of management consultants in collecting, analyzing, and presenting market-related information to the client. Research Paper Outline? Brainstormed with experts in creating the design for market researches. Analyzed industry trends and customer preferences on coke case study women’s apparel. Notable accomplishments are the following: Designed a questionnaire that yielded a 80% response rate within one week. Conducted a field interview in shops and boutiques with only research plans, 1% data collection error. Wrote a qualitative analysis of research results after thorough brainstorming.

For recent graduates, education plays an important role in the resume. My Best Friend Essay? Showing stellar academic achievement and involvement in activities that conferred new strengths and skills will help show preparation for a career in management consulting. It serves as your foundation for entering the competitive industry of management consulting. Paper Plans? It’s the indicator of your knowledge, competencies, and values. You can include the my best friend for class, following information in this section:

Here is a good example: Master of Business Administration/Master of Public Administration. Key achievements: Graduated summa cum laude. Focus on relevance when adding skills. You may have a number of practical skills, but they might not be practical for management consulting.

Think carefully about what skills you have, such as languages, software, negotiation/communication, and how they fit into your future career. Paper Outline? Consider how and why a consulting firm would need or want these skills. If in doubt, find tangible examples of how a less obvious connection can be made between your skill(s) and the consulting career or leave that particular skill out of your resume. Operations: Teambuilding, human resource management, strategy planning, competitive analysis, conflict and problem resolution, project management, risk assessment and management. Financial organization: PL management, financial reporting, budgetary management. Communications: Developing and coke study, conducting seminars, negotiation, community outreach.

Languages: Native English, native Spanish, fluent French, intermediate business Mandarin Chinese. Personal interests do not need to be included in a management consulting resume, especially if you are running short on space. Interests are more often included in outline, European CVs than American ones. You will not be penalized for congo essay, failing to add personal interests. Some personal interests and research paper outline, hobbies, though, illustrate a certain level of perseverance, motivation and passion that may set you apart from other applicants. Being a lifelong competitive marathon runner who trains consistently may have very little to a tma do with consulting but does display a level of discipline and tolerance for research plans, hard work. My Best Friend 8? A history of community service and voluntary work displays personal integrity and research outline, commitment. These personal traits may not fit neatly into a “skills and experience” box, but you do not want to fit too neatly into essay for class 8 a box either. Plans? Briefly show interests where you feel it strengthens your application and coke vs pepsi study, makes you stand apart from paper your competition.

One line for interests will do, such as the example below: Personal Interests: Animal illustration, playing the write a tma, guitar, and paper outline, landscape photography. Once you have written your resume, proofread it to perfection. You may be able to think of better ways to anne bradstreet to my husband essay represent yourself the second time you go over it. Never send out a resume without checking the content and form; your candidacy is at stake. Below is paper outline plans, a short checklist to ensure that your resume is perfect: Does it communicate the message you want to convey?

Ensure that it proves you will be an asset to democratic republic congo the firm. If you miss this part, the research paper outline, answers to the rest of the to my and loving husband essay, questions are fruitless. Is it tailored to the goals and requirements of the management consulting firm? It is critical that the recruiter sees that your qualities and personality match the position and the corporate culture. Is the data accurate? Remember that some recruiters validate the information.

They sometimes enter your name in the search box, check your LinkedIn profiles, or call your previous supervisors to confirm what you’ve written. Is it free of typos and grammatical mistakes? These embarrassing blunders reflect poor communication skills and lack of attention to detail. Don’t give the impression that you don’t possess these basic qualities every consultant must have. Is the research paper, text legible? Don’t use a small font size to accommodate everything on one page, but don’t make it too large because then it occupies too much space.

Fancy fonts are highly discouraged. Arial, Tahoma, Times New Roman, Calibri, and friend for class, other conventional font styles are recommended. Does it have the correct margins? The white space around the research outline plans, text and in between categories makes your document reader-friendly. How To Write A Tma? Is the length sufficient? One page is ideal, two is acceptable, but anything more than that is too long.

If possible, ask a friend or professional to read your management consulting resume. Research Paper Outline Plans? Sometimes, a fresh set of eyes can give you objective feedback. Exercise care when writing a management consultant resume, otherwise you might commit the following mistakes: Some resumes end up in job objective resume, the trash because applicants do not consider this as a critical step or they find it too troublesome to follow the aforementioned guidelines. As a result, they end up preparing an updated, generic resume they can readily print whenever they send out an paper, application. Is this a good idea? Yes and no. Yes, to anne bradstreet dear and loving having an updated, generic resume ready in your hard drive because it can serve as your main reference source each time you tailor your resume to fit the firm you apply to. No, to the one-size-fits-all approach because your application will always have an impersonal tone and therefore won’t catch the recruiter’s attention.

Misrepresentation of research paper, Competencies. Another common mistake is misrepresenting oneself. True, you must project your best self in essay for class, your resume, but it doesn’t mean you can make up stories in order to be noticed. If you do, you are fabricating information, a violation against honesty and integrity. Even if you are successful in the preliminary screening, your capabilities will still be evaluated during the interview. If you fail to prove you possess the abilities you say you do, you will be rejected and you will realize that you have wasted your and the recruiter’s time and effort. Even if you follow all the guidelines in this post, there is still a probability that you might not be invited to interview. Unfortunately, it’s a sad reality that there’s an research paper plans, abundance of applicants in job objective, this industry. You are competing against candidates as qualified as you, so after sending out outline plans, your job application, you may want to: Remember to always be proactive in your application.

Nobody said that breaking into this industry is an easy venture. Just take things one step at a time and you will get there one day. For detailed guidelines on coke vs pepsi essays how to research paper plans write management consulting resumes, download the Guide to Cover Letters and research paper, Resumes. It was written from a recruiter’s point of view, after intensive research and paper outline plans, coordination with many applicants. Download Free Guide: How to Get a Consulting Job. Copyright © 2010-2017, ConsultingFact.com. How To Write A Tma? All Rights Reserved.

Google+. Do you want to break into paper consulting? Download our free PDF guide, which will show you the necessary steps and vs pepsi case, best practices on how to prepare.

Write My Paper -
Research Paper Outline - How to Write a Research Paper

Parts To A 5 Paragraph Essay #8212; 654516. 0 , 1 , stagrazgzaviti 1 . Parts To A 5 Paragraph Essay. Five-paragraph essay #8212; WikipediaThe five- paragraph essay is a format of essay include the other parts while emphasizing the particular part ). Another form of the paper outline, 5 part essay How to research Write a 5-Paragraph Essay #8212; ThoughtCoThe 5 #8212; paragraph essay is outline plans a model that instructors use to teach students the basic elements of a great essay . Build upon job objective, this model by research paper outline, adding paragraphs .How to Write a 5-Paragraph Essay : Topics, Outline, Thesis The 5 #8212; Paragraph essay is the universal standard format. Whether you are writing a persuasive piece or just a story, this is the coke essays, go-to structure! Parts of a 5 paragraph essay #8212; PV Plus Parts of a 5 paragraph essay #8212; Learn all you need to know about paper plans custom writing Instead of worrying about research paper writing find the necessary help The Five-Paragraph Essay #8212; CommNetA classic format for compositions is the friend for class, five- paragraph essay . Paper Outline Plans. and to describe people is part of his 5 In The Tell-Tale Heart, a careful What are the parts to anne bradstreet to my dear and loving a five paragraph essay #8212; Answers.comA 5 paragraph essay is the simplest and most usual form of essay . The basic structure contains an introduction, three paragraphs forming the main body of Parts of research plans a 5 paragraph essay | Sales Architects Parts of a 5 paragraph essay #8212; receive a 100% original, plagiarism-free thesis you could only imagine about in our custom writing help Let professionals do Parts of my best essay a 5 paragraph essay | College Essays Thus, they should be able to write it parts of a 5 paragraph essay . Could you do it. If you havent yet noticed the benefits of contractual relationships What Are the 5 Parts of an Essay ? | The Pen and The Pad When you first learn how to write an essay , you are usually taught how to write the five- paragraph essay . As you develop as a writer and outline move on to higher How to Write a Five Paragraph Essay (with Examples wiki How to Write a Five Paragraph Essay . Dear. Five Parts : 5 . Conclude your paragraph by linking back to your thesis. Summarize the points you’ve made in.

What are the parts to a five paragraph essay #8212; Answers.com. A 5 paragraph essay is the simplest and research outline most usual form of essay . How To Write. The basic structure contains an introduction, three paragraphs forming the research paper plans, main body of Parts of republic congo a 5 paragraph essay #8212; Opt for research paper outline plans Expert and Cheap Parts of congo a 5 paragraph essay #8212; Entrust your assignments to the most talented writers. Outline. professional writers working in the service will accomplish your Parts of a 5 paragraph essay #8212; Smart and friend for class Affordable Custom Parts of a 5 paragraph essay #8212; Only HQ academic services provided by top professionals. Craft a timed custom term paper with our assistance and research paper outline plans make your Parts of a 5 paragraph essay #8212; gav-allfeed.comThe five essay a parts of paragraph . parts of my best friend essay 8 a 5 paragraph essay The most important rule of writing is plans methods and procedures in thesis that there are no Parts Of A 5 Paragraph Essay #8212; Floating LedgeFive- paragraph essay #8212; Wikipedia The five- paragraph essay is anne a format of essay having five paragraphs : one introductory The five parts , whose names vary The parts of a 5 paragraph essay #8212; wellfitnessstudios.comBasic Essay Parts To see the original PowerPoint writing a research paper part 1 How to Write a Five Paragraph Essay #8212; PowerPoint How to Write a Five Parts of a Five Paragraph Essay #8212; Custom Essays What are the research outline, parts of a five paragraph essay ? First of all, you need to specify a topic. This topic may come from general subjects like literature, How to vs pepsi case Write an research paper outline, Effective Essay : Formulas for coke vs pepsi study Five How to Write an research paper outline, Effective Essay : Formulas for Five-Paragraph Essay How to write a 5 Paragraph Essay Paragraph for Your Essay How to Write a Good Five Paragraph Essay What#039;s the democratic congo essay, secret to writing a good five paragraph essay ? Well, the tips contained here, and this sample outline can#039;t hurt! Learn how to choose a good How To Write a Five Paragraph Essay #8212; ThoughtCoHow to research Write a Five Paragraph Essay . Learn about the essential elements of a well written paragraph in English. Learn to coke vs pepsi Write a 5 Paragraph Essay .What are the parts of a 5 paragraph essay #8212; HalogeneratorsFollowing the Update, your website should what are the parts of paper outline plans a 5 paragraph essay load when the domain name is usc honors college essays accessed in 8, any. How to Write in the Format of a 3. 5 Essay . As part of the introduction, you Write three body paragraphs . The middle of your 3. 5 essay is made up of 5 parts of a 5 paragraph essay #8212; mrlawn.net 5 parts of a 5 paragraph essay . Essay thesis statement kal?plar? + help write thesis lewis goodreadsessay introduction paragraph kal plar essay proficiency Parts of a five paragraph essay #8212; Wildcat Golf Paragraph 1: The Introduction. Research. Writing assignment series The Five Paragraph Essay The five paragraph essay measures a student#039;s basic writing skills, and What Are The Parts Of A 5 Paragraph Essay #8212; astonybg.comFive- paragraph essay #8212; Wikipedia The five- paragraph essay is democratic republic congo essay a format of essay having five paragraphs : one introductory paragraph , The five- part essay parts to a 5 paragraph essay | Di?n dan mua ban rao v?t Kurtis Jordan from Canton was looking for research paper plans parts to a 5 paragraph essay Joaquin Hicks found the answer to a search query parts to a 5 paragraph essay electroyachtsolution.com #8212; What Are The Parts Of A 5 The Five- Paragraph Essay #8212; CommNetThe Five- Paragraph Essay . Writing Introductory Paragraphs for different ways of getting your reader involved in your essay .Three parts of a 5 paragraph essay #8212; laskarsantrinusantara.orgUpdate. Three parts of and loving husband a 5 paragraph essay ; Apel Perdamaian 9-9-9-9 untuk Rohingya; Komitmen Laskar Santri Nusantara Dalam Menumbuhkan Jiwa Mandiri How To Write a Five Paragraph Essay #8212; ThoughtCoHow to Write a Five Paragraph Essay . Paper. Learn about the essential elements of a well written paragraph in English.

Learn to Write a 5 Paragraph Essay .Tips for Writing a Five Paragraph Essay for Standardized Standardized tests usually include writing a five paragraph essay , Essay Writing for coke study essays Standardized Tests: Tips for research paper plans The best part about. . , , . . Coke Case Study Essays. – . walmart pharmacy price check http://canadianpharmacyrxbsl.com/ best non prescription online pharmacies prednisone for dogs side effects canadian pharmacies without prescriptions inderal medication. 54 -, . Paper Outline. . , , http://kupikassa.ru/ , -, . , ohotavotkinsk.ru , , . ohotavotkinsk.ru 250 10 550 . How To Write A Tma. , . : - , – - SEO-, 50-80 . - : http://proflinks.ru/page/33 , , : https://prnt.sc/gh8u2j , , . () : http://proflinks.ru/registration/14080 , «», , 40 ., . , . , . Paper Outline Plans. . Essay For Class. 640 , 10-15 . . . : 125212, . , , 1 ( « »)

Write My Research Paper for Me -
What is a preliminary outline for a research paper? |…

filezilla resume FileZilla version 2.2.24a. FileZilla is a fast FTP client with an easy to use interface which is available in paper outline different languages. The Site Manager, DragDrop and the transfer queue help you to resume control your tasks. Research Outline Plans? FileZilla can connect to almost every FTP server, even if you are behind a firewall or SOCKS proxy. On SFTP servers and servers which support SSL or Kerberos GSS, all traffic can be encrypted. Ability to how to write resume Uploads/Downloads (if the server supports it) Custom Commands Site Manager with folders Keep Alive system Timeout detection Firewall support SOCKS4/5 and outline HTTP1.1 Proxy support SSL secured connections SFTP support Upload/Download Queue DragDrop Multi-language support GSS authentication and encryption using Kerberos.

Requirements: Windows XP, 2000, 95, 98, NT or ME, (reported to my best friend for class work under Linux with Wine, too) Up-to-Date MFC and Common Controls version. If you get an error message like A required .DLL file wasnґt found, MFC42.DLL or LOADER ERROR: The ordinal 6929 could not be located in the dynamic link library MFC42.DLL or other startup crashes, you have to research outline update your system DLLs. An update program is friend 8, available on research paper outline the FileZilla download page (FzDLLUpdate.exe). Kerberos for write a tma Windows if you want to research paper outline plans use the job objective resume, GSS support. This program is licensed under the GPL. FileZilla contains parts of the PuTTY suite - see the PuTTY license.

This license affects the sftp stub FzSFtp.exe and all its source files unless otherwise mentioned. Credits (in chronological order): Xiaowen Xin - Additional developer. Michael Muehldorfer - German translation. Piotr Murawski, Rafal Lampe - Polish translation. Jose Brito - Spanish translation. Fabien Illide - French translation. Simon Tatham and his team for PuTTY. Andrea Sanavia - Italian translation. Asparouh Kalyandjiev - Bulgarian translation. Bata Gyrgy - Hungarian translation.

'Doberman' - Additional developer. Yuan Chia Fu - Traditional Chinese translation. Roman Ruckschloss - Additional developer. 'Thunder White' - Simplified Chinese translation. Philippe Curtil - French translation of documentation. Takashi Yamaguchi - Japanese translation. 'Sergey' - Russian translation. Kim Jinwook - Korean translation. Eirik Hodne - Norwegian translation. Vojtech Sazel - Czech translation. Oscar Martinez - Catalan translation.

Malin - Slovak translation. Yi-Kwan Chen - patch for IPv6 support. Chen-hsiu Huang - some patches. Tommy Wu - UTF8 support patch. Special thanks to: Christian Brueffer and Max Moellers for the idea of research paper writing a FTP client. CodeProject and write Codeguru - good pages for VC++ developers, thanks for the great articles! Everybody else who helped to improve FileZilla by research paper outline plans reporting bugs or for their suggestions. Local directory tree now displays Desktop and My Documents. (Patch #1492243 by cole945) Fall back to local charset if login data contains non-ascii characters and democratic congo login fails.

Fixes compatiblity with non-UTF8 aware servers Fix speed limits, limit could get exceeded if three or more files were transferred simultaneously. Fix compability with non-standard desktop locations (2.2.24a) Now using Unicode internally. Plans? As result, no longer runs on Windows 9x/ME. This should fix every charset conversion issue as long as the server supports UTF8. Fix critical buffer overflow. Remote code execution might have been possible if connecting to democratic republic congo a malicious server. Fix performance issues on systems with more than one CPU.

Fix problem with UTF-8 detection (2.2.23a) Added menu entry to clear quickconnect history. Queue pane no longer vanishes if FileZilla gets minimized and restored. File truncation problem with SSL uploads Use port 990 if host is prefixed with ftps:// in research quickconnect bar. Added /quit command-line parameter to coke vs pepsi study close all open instances of FileZilla. Queue pane should no longer shrink if remembering window size and position /config now properly expands environment variables. Fixed problem with SSL transfers aborting or even crashing the research, server. Improved CLNT command detection for job objective UTF-8 support Fix SSL rekeying.

Fix infinite loop in local directory tree on mapped drives with case-sensitive filesystem Supports some more localized directory listing formats Clear pending messages if destroying socket. Don't resolve hostnames if using SOCKS4A, SOCKS5 or HTTP proxies. Support for servers needing an account for research paper outline plans successful logon using ACCT command experimental support for my best essay for class 8 BS-2000 servers. On servers sending nonstandard directory listings, files did not display if their filetime was between 0:00 and 0:59. Fix parsing of URLs of the form ftp://user@host in the quickconnect bar Create empty directories if dropping files from outline plans, Windows Explorer into FileZilla. Fixed crash on directory refresh while editing filename Some users didn't see file icons in my best for class 8 the remote filelist.

Setting a speed limit while a file was being uploaded could abort the plans, transfer. Fixed a few crashes Compatibility fixes for MVS type servers Incorrect sorting in vs pepsi case study Site Manager. Add option to set default anonymous login password. Crash if loading corrupted queue items Compatibility with servers not understanding CDUP Some typos and other minor fixes. PROT command was not sent if using implicit SSL Move TYPE command before PORT/PASV command If showing Site Manager on startup, main window did not always appear. Connection freeze after SSL Initialization If taskbar was not at the bottom or right of the research paper, screen, window size was not remembered correctly Fixed parsing of files with times between 0:00 and job objective 0:59 in research paper old vshell style listings. Changed automatic refresh of local file list: Refresh unconditonally if a file has been added, removed or renamed If file size or last write time changes, refresh only if FileZilla gets the resume, focus. Some servers require the CLNT command before UTF-8 support works Time based speed limit rules over midnight did not work as intended Fixed a small problem which could cause downloads of file to timeout if using speed limits Splitter positions were not saved correctly, causing queue pane size to research paper outline change between restarts. UTF-8 settings were not saved for reconnect button Disable UTF-8 on some really broken servers which refuse to send valid UTF-8 strings even if explicitly requested. UTF-8 support can be controlled manually for each server in essay the Site Manager.

Handle UTF8 on broken servers that disobey RFC 2640. Paper Outline? They have UTF8 in the FEAT response but do not use UTF8 unless OPTS UTF8 ON gets send. Broken servers are, amongst others, G6 FTP Server and my best friend 8 RaidenFTPd. Paper? Crash if queue caused a refresh of a local file in the list while scanning a directory. Fixed buffer overflow and memory leak introduced in 2.2.12. Local file list refreshes automatically on bradstreet to my dear and loving husband essay changes, patch by research outline Chen-hsiu Huang UTF8 support on essays servers supporting it, patch by Tommy Wu. Updated SSL/TLS handling class Pausing files in queue did not work properly. Critical security vulnerability in PuTTY. Details available on research PuTTY homepage Ascii files could become truncated on coke vs pepsi study essays file uploads if a speed limit was set.

If server does not allow resuming, prompt for file exists action if APPE fails Add support for research outline plans unix style directory listings with named size information (e.g. 7.5k) Parsing VxWorks type listings did not work properly fixed some crashes. Fixed critical security issue in SFTP code caused by security vulnetability in dear PuTTY. Research Paper Outline? Please read http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/ sgtatham/putty/wishlist/vuln-ssh2-debug.html for details. Directory listing parser improvements: Add support for write a tma VxWorks based servers used in Nortel routers, add support for research paper outline more uncommon date formats. Internal changes to allow compilation on Win64. Uploads of research paper files with exactly 16384 bytes did always report failure despite the file being uploaded correctly. Research? This may have affected uploads of other files as well. Job Objective? On MVS servers, CServerPath::ChangePath did not respect the bIsFile argument. This may have caused manual transfers to plans fail. greatly improved MVS support could not delete directories on VMS servers support for wfFtp servers used in how to write Nortel routers support for non ascii strings in SSL certificates display certificate times in verify cert dialog again.

After uploads, the remote file list was not refreshed properly improved compatibility with VMS and MVS servers experimental GSSAPI IPv6 support. experimental IPv6 support, only paper outline works under Windows XP or 2003 Server or newer. Based on write a tma patch by research plans Yi-Kwan Chen Timestamps in job objective message log added IBM MVS support On VMS based servers, display of all file revisions can be enabled. fixed security issues caused by paper outline plans PuTTY File transfers did not work on servers returning unquoted paths in the PWD reply FZ did crash if ident server was enabled (2.2.8a) Crash fixes in directory listing parser and transfer queue compatibility with VMS server not including time in directory listings misc parser compatibility (2.2.7c) SSL libs could not be loaded if msvcr71.dll was missing. My Best Friend? Removed that dependancy. Research Outline? File exists actions on speed research transfer page in settings did not work properly Fixed regression introduced in 2.2.7 which caused most file operations to use file creation time instead of last modification time FileZilla did follow symbolic links if deleting remote files/folders. Fixed bugs: chmod did not work for file without or unknown attributes crashes related to files with invalid timestamps SSL problem which sometimes prevented uploading of files and may have had other symptoms as well.

Support for international domain names Added Czech language files Added Catalan language files. Fixed some reported crashes, even the research plans, dreaded file exists crash dirlisting parser compatibility. Added Norwegian translation You can now specify the a tma, location of the paper outline, config file using the -config file command line parameter. If parsing the job objective resume, server address from the command line, FileZilla now also recognizes protocol identifies prefixed with fz_ , like fz_ftp:// or fz_sftp:// The -s site command line parameter can be used to connect to paper plans specified site in the Site Manager. You'll have to job objective resume specify the whole path and name for paper the site, separated by backslashes. Fix for download of files with certain characters invalid under Windows. Speed Research? Fixed crash with file viewing/editing No longer compress the research paper, binaries with UPX, VC++ 7.1 doesn't seem to like that at how to write a tma, all. Improved SSL certificate verification. You can know put a list of known root certificates into research paper plans the file cacert.pem Sticky bit can be set with the anne bradstreet dear, file attributes dialog Message log font can now be changed added TLS support position of research plans local and job objective resume remote views can be switched (2.2.4c) 2.2.4c and 2.2.4d didn't run on NT4 (2.2.4e) 2.2.4c did not run on outline Win95/98 (2.2.4d) resolved remaining SSL issues (2.2.4c) Connect:Enterprise directory listing compatibility (2.2.4c) crash with invalid dates in directory listings (2.2.4c) fixed incompatibility between Visual C++ 7.1, UPX and Windows 2003 Server (2.2.4b) downloading files using SSL should no longer produce incomplete files (2.2.4b) fixed bug in CServerPath constructor (2.2.4a) Upgraded to Visual C++ 7.1 and job objective resume now linked statically against the runtime libraries, this may fix some rare crashes.

Fixed regression with the Connect:Enterprise server directory listing format. Improved comtabibility with some windows servers which do not support paths prefixed with slashes Added support for research paper outline paths in the form DIR.SUBDIR1.SUBDIR2. Anne Bradstreet To My And Loving Husband? Local/remote file lists were not always sorted correctly some SSL fixes drawing problems if running under wine improved caching if creating directories some reported crashes have been fixed. Improved dragdrop, you can now move files and folders to other directories using dragdrop inside the file lists and plans folder trees. If using registry as storage and my best friend essay no Site Manager entries under HKCUSoftwareFileZilla exist, look under HKLMSoftwareFileZilla (2.2.3a)

Resolved a few directory caching issues Creation of outline plans drag images no longer uses the study essays, built-in windows functions as they don't work properly under Windows XP Fixed settings dialog not appearing correctly if running under wine Fixed crash if selecting OK on paper the delete file confirmation dialog after disconnecting / receiving a new directory listing while displaying the dialog. added filetype column to remote file list file lists can now be sorted over the view menu, even if not using details style added Add to queue as selection for default file doubleclick action added Korean language files. fixed VShell server compatibility fixed queue releated crash no longer automatically try to resume transfer of research ascii files after transfer failure, it did cause troubled due to outline different line endings. Paper? compatibility fixes for directory listing parser allow SFTP transfers if LIST fails. No longer always force passive mode if using proxy server and site has 'bypass proxy/firewall' enabled Fixed file exists dialog crashes. Fixed deadlock if resuming upload of complete files on SFTP servers ASCII/Binary mode was not set properly.

added comments field to Site Manager, moved default local/remote directories to advanced page. added Russian translation added support for servers with send multiple code 1yz replies on RETR/STOR/APPE commands remember and restore focus of last active window if main window loses and outline regains focus slightly improved compatibility of directory listing parser. fixed sftp speed problem, SFTP transfers should be much faster now (2.2.1a) fixed XML file problems (2.2.1a) the resume, problem with the extremely low upload speed on outline plans certain servers has been fixed fixed problems with disabled quickconnect bar don't create local folders if deleting empty dirs on the server fixed crash if clicking backspace if remote filelist was empty possible fix for the file exists crashes fixed stalling GSS transfers. added combobox with recent folders to coke case local views empty directories are now created during up/downloads added support for IBM AS/400 style directory listings directory listing parser now understands Spanish month names. Queue related crashes have been fixed. default action when a file is double-clickded can be set Added Japanese translation. opening settings dialog with Polish language file did craseh (2.1.9a) fixed selection problems in queue (2.1.9a) Slightly improved performance of directory listing parser Fixed timing issue with downloading small files and passive mode resulting in 0 size files Automatic retry after failed connection attempt did not work downloading files over GSS secured connections could produce corrupt files. Large code review of the transfer queue, greatly improved speed if adding large numbers of files to research the queue New Message Log window, text can now be selected PASV mode settings and my best friend server timezone can be set for each site in the Site Manager. Connect to research outline plans default site did not use the custom active/pasv settings (2.1.8c) fixed problems with the message log some users had using Win98 (2.1.8b) active/passive mode in SiteManager was switched (2.1.8a) queue import did not work ascii/binary settings were not restored if loading queue fixed problems with adding directories to queue and deleting directories on the server Speed limit rules no longer stop working after showing settings dialog Fixed transfer of last few bytes on SSL uploads, should no longer be missing.

Crashes on SSL servers have been fixed Language was always reset to English if language page hasn't been views if changing settings user/pass authentication for anne dear and loving husband SOCKS5 proxies did not work properly fixed transfer of large files from/to GSS enabled servers improved compatibility of directory listing parser, can now parse OS2 style directory listings. Version 2.1.6a (2003-04-18): added SSH protocol and compression selection for research paper SFTP transfers added minimize to vs pepsi case essays tray button some interface improvements, including xp theme awareness the IP address used for research active mode transfers can be specified. Hostnames are also supported. quickconnect history will be remembered between sessions. language was reset to english if using settings dialog without viewing language page (fixed in 2.1.6a) fixed crash if resuming files larger than 4 GB fixed crash and improved compatibility with some servers in the directory listing parser Some problems with the SSL code have been fixed. now using the coke, STLport library, the STL implementation Microsoft was responsible for research paper a lot of democratic essay crashes and paper other misbehaviour. added statusbar to local and speed research paper remote file list which shows the paper plans, number of my best friend essay (selected) folders and files with their size added remote group / owner column sort settings of paper outline fileviews can be saved Aborting file exists dialog now skips transfer enlarged transfer buffer, high-speed FTP transfers should be slightly faster now. renamed gssapi.dll into democratic republic essay FzGSS.dll. If you have gssapi.dll from older version in your FileZilla folder, you can delete it. Research Outline? improved exception handling updated to OpenSSL version 0.9.7a. FTP over SSL no longer forces passive mode remote column widths were not saved correctly fixed download options page in installer fixed crash if no data was sent/received during transfer for over 60 seconds and transfer did continue then silent installer now working properly (use /S switch) Version 2.1.4b (2003-02-23): added Connect and job objective resume bypass proxy settings item to paper plans quickconnect menu added browse for folder button to write a tma local folder field in Sitemanager Backspace can be used to go up one folder added simplified chinese directory listing parser now supports numerical listings and the format VShell server sends. Fixes and research paper outline plans improvements: directory listings / transfers did not always start (2.1.4b) fixed compatibility with servers sending 226 after RETR/STOR/APPE without opening a data connection (2.1.4b) could not enter drive roots into local directory input field (2.1.4b) fixed queue releated crash (2.1.4b) automatic retrying did not work (2.1.4a) fixed crash and a tma changed transfer logic for downloads fixed upload resuming improved parsing of MS-DOS style directory listing fixed problem with downloading file links and research paper plans failed directory transfers local file list control no longer loses focus if changing directory fixed problem with GSS not working properly (Did happen if encrypted strings received from server were not null-terminated) added Speed Limit settings (written by Roman Ruckschloss) SiteManager can be configures to not expand folder on start and to research paper sort folders before sites (written by Jonathon Merz) added dropdown menu to Sitemanager button in paper outline plans toolbar (written by coke vs pepsi case study essays Roman Ruckschloss) added Traditional Chinese language files.

added EPLF directory listing parser. fixed parsing of paths containing spaces with quickconnect. fixed crash with very long filenames (256 chars) horizontal scrolling in message log did not work correctly. slightly improved directory listing parsing speed. fixed some interface glitches and plans rare crashes.

proxy support works again (2.1.3a) copy URL to republic congo clipboard. added menu to quickconnect bar, including clear item and paper plans quickconnect history. some minor interface improvements. could not upload readonly files to how to a tma sftp servers. now compatible with the paper outline, directory listings of more servers. fixed some other compatiblity issues. now verifying SSH Host key during authentication with SFTP server. simple Ident Server for FTP servers which required ident running on job objective the user's machine. some issues with the transfer queue, did abort queue to early and queue data could get mixed up.

SFTP speed slightly increased. No longer asking every time FileZilla starts whether to use the registry or the paper outline, XML file on research Win9x systems. some compatibility issues with some uncommon servers. minor changes, mostly small bugfixes. added XML settings storage. improved link support.

Still handling all links as directories but treating them as files if directory changing fails. added Enter FTP command to server menu. sometimes transfers could crash if target file did already exist. ftp list parser did not trim indicators properly. parsing url from command line did not work (fixed in 2.1.0a) Using multiple connections can be disabled in the queue menu. fixed typos in docs, thanks to outline plans Geoff Gigg. improved queue logic. cache could 'forget' directories.

can now hide remote date and democratic congo essay time separatly. did not remember view settings correctly. crash when opening settings dialog more than once. now trying to use the connection password to decrypt a encrypted public key file from the default PuTTY configuration when connecting to SFTP servers. GSS support did not work properly, gssapi.dll was not thread-safe. Version 2.0.0 final (2002-09-02): multiple simultaneous transfers. A single dot in outline the list of ascii file extensions specifies all files without extension. faster queue loading/saving. added bulgarian and hungarian translation.

some compatibility fixes in anne and loving husband directory listing parser. rename option had no effect in file exists dialog. manual transfer could crash FileZilla. local file list did not update when a new directory was created during downloads. History of research outline 2.0.0 beta versions: Fixed bugs since beta 6: Adjustment of maximum number of simultaneous transfers during transfer no longer crashes FileZilla. The file exists dialog no longer pops several times at democratic republic, the same time when transferring several files simultaneously. Transfers no longer fail during directory creation if the research outline, directory has already been created by to my husband essay another thread.

Reducing number of transfers for research paper plans single servers if they don't accept enough simultaneous connections. Version 2.0.0 beta 6: multiple simultaneous transfers. primary connection will be used for transfer if server does not support multiple connections. A single dot in the list of ascii file extensions specifies all files without extension. some compatibility fixes in directory listing parser. Version 2.0.0 beta 5: browsing during transfer.

faster queue loading/saving. added bulgarian and how to hungarian translation. rename option had no effect in file exists dialog. manual transfer could crash FileZilla. local file list did not update when a new directory was created during downloads. some queue related bugs. Version 1.9.9a (2002-07-20): added italian translation. bypass proxy / firewall settings in SiteManager did not work. when transferring file from/to an research outline plans sftp server with disabled directory cache, FileZilla could crash. could not cancel connection attempts while waiting for my best 8 a retry.

remote files can be edited directly with the plans, programs specified in the settings. now multi-line directory listings (some VMS servers use them) are supported. site manager tree now scrolls when dragging items around. added secure mode, set HKCUSoftwareFileZillaRun In secure Mode or HKLMSoftwareFileZillaRun In secure Mode to 1 to resume enable it or run the research paper outline, installer. Main window no longer flickers that much while resizing. fixed display of local root. current server will be shown in for class 8 title bar. manual download enhanced, it's now called manual transfer, can be completely customized for both uploads and downloads. improved speed of local file list when refreshing.

extremely fast refresh of local file list after file downloads or when deleting files. new transparent socket layer classes, should fix remaining problems with SOCKS4/5 and HTTP 1.1 proxies. fixed MKD on some *NIX servers. fixed Connect to default site on Win9x. fixed file list sorting with selected items. remote file list was not updated when deleting a directory which contained uppercase characters. some minor bugs and glitches. fixed reconnect issues when using multiple instances of FileZilla. correct local folder will be set if Open Site Manager each time FileZilla starts is checked.

fixed the outline, Authentication failed Kerberos GSS problem under Win98. remote file list now refreshes after changing file attributes. fixed reconnect remembering incorrect passwords. new Winsock wraper class, improves speed. drag drop in job objective Site Manager. fixed problem with transfers stalling at 100% fixed 'overwrite if newer' entering relative paths in the remote combo box working again. improved retry logic. fixed transfer queue related crash. remote view will be correctly updated when directory cache is research plans, enabled. remote directory tree.

option to remember local and remote column widths. option to a tma customize display of filesizes. some minor interface problems. fixed some GSS and outline plans SSL bugs. some crashes reported by users. basic SSL certificate verification. show hidden files (dotfiles) option in main menu.

added exception report generation. after 30 seconds FileZilla took the default values for options. support for write files larger than 2GB. some minor interface and SSL bugs. remote date/time sorting.

fixed bug when using proxy servers. file exist dialog did not show file sizes. resolving hostname asynchronously. download of multiple selected files and folders failed. remote file list did not refresh on delete. SHIFT+TAB now switches backwards through panes.

fixed crash when uploading. filesizes for files larger than 2.1 GB were shown incorrectly in outline plans transfer queue. remove some minor memory leaks. Showing Empty directory listing when there are no files within a remote directory. using the republic, delete key no longer deletes a site in the Site Manager when the paper outline, Sitetree is not selected. Fixed a problem where a transfer could stall until timeout.

fixed problem with incorrect remote file dates. remote file list gets automatically refreshed when unknown entries are present (files with . as size/date/time for example) fixed crash which happened after cache purge timeout. server password can be changed if server allows it. keep alive system now enabled by default (does not affect existing settings) directory creation. Now also works with servers which don't allow creating multiple levels at once. transfer size for queue items not loaded correctly after restart of FileZilla. passive mode not working correctly. crash when choosing properties from the local file list when there was no file/folder/drive selected. new interface to speed paper ftp API. added internal options cache, increases performance. added HTTP1.1 and SOCKS4A proxy support.

support for single-line (Open)VMS directory listing. fixed problem with multi-line responses. fixed a timeout problem. entries in paper plans remote file list can be searched by research paper entering first few characters, just like in research outline local file list or in windows explorer. Version 1.7b (2001-11-23): crash when installed in essay a folder with spaces. Version 1.7a (2001-11-18): fixed problem with folders in sitemanager under Win9x/ME. folders in sitemanager.

added Spanish translation. increased speed of research outline plans remote file list, now there's almost no difference between 10 or 10000 files. reduced size of additional language files. parsing of directory listings could fail on friend essay 8 certain servers. sorting by date/time did not work for remote list. some problems with language files. crash when starting from console in Win NT, 2K and research paper outline plans XP. window size and position can be remembered.

the tab key now switches between the views. new keyboard shortcuts (see documentation for more details) import and export of queue items. added queue section to main menu. CHMOD of multiple files and vs pepsi case folders at once. added context menu to research paper plans local treeview. manual download entry in my best friend essay for class transfer menu. added polish language file. local directory was reset to on paper outline refresh.

don't remember password setting did not effect reconnect to server. upload crash when using active mode SOCKS4/5 transfers. Version 1.5a (2001-09-18): passive mode downloads could timeout without reason. up- and essay 8 downloads could fail due to uninitialized buffer. CTRL+A in file lists works now. upload problem with certain directory structures with empty directories solved. remote directories could not be deleted. ASCII transfers would cause crash. fixed more queue bugs.

FileZilla crashed when trying to research paper outline delete the .. entry in the folder views. as always, a lot of minor fixes. overwrite if newer option in the FileExists dialog. local files can be opened. fixed SOCKS5 auth code (Thanks to resume Mike Shuetter) fixed problem with transfer timeouts. remote folders that only contained files with spaces in their names were displayed incorrectly. site manager may be automatically opened on startup. default local folder in research paper plans site manager. default site in democratic republic congo essay site manager.

don't save password option in site manager. added GSS authentication and paper outline encryption support. Requires Kerberos for democratic republic essay Windows. timeout detection fixed. fixed display of total queue size when there are a lot of items in the queue (2GB) support for NT servers which use the research outline plans, MS-DOS like directory listing. replaced the edit field over resume the ftp view with a combo box.

You can switch the style of the file list views. The following styles are supported: details, list, large icons and small icons. In details style, you can show/hide most columns. Enter-key in the file views usable. when shift key is pressed you can now delete the files in the local view without moving the to research outline plans the recycle bin (just like in democratic republic congo Explorer now) shlwapi.dll is no longer needed, replaced by some self-written functions. improved transfer queue. crashes due to research plans a bug in my best essay CSplitterWnd. file transfers in research outline plans passive mode crashed. bug in bradstreet and loving husband transfer code. Research Paper? Input file for uploads was not opened sometimes. some minor issues I don't remember.

support for ASCII mode transfer. filetype auto-detection (based on extension) added dir edit field to local view. added view labels for coke study essays local and remote view. message log and quickconnect bar can now be hidden. options page for research plans the interface settings. Interface settings can be remembered. all settings can be exported (including queue and sitemanager) totally rewritten thread and FTP API classes. My Best Friend? Now using asynchronous sockets. Better performance and stability now.

Code is much cleaner now. fixed bug in firewall setting dialog: FW data input fields were not enabled when a firewall type other than none was selected. file attributes on plans the server can be changed (CHMOD command) active connections can now be copied into the Site Manger over the menu. the total size of the queue is 8, displayed on research the right side of the coke vs pepsi essays, status bar. added upload / download as. Research Paper? entries to bradstreet husband essay the context menus. Research Plans? With it you can enter a different account that will be used for the transfer. files and folders can now be dragged directly into the queue. made some internal changes to republic congo essay the upload/download queue. rewrote large parts of the paper plans, local file list. Large folders will be displayed faster now.

fixed a menu bug in the Site Manager. fixed a Drag Drop bug: The folder .. Friend Essay For Class 8? could be dragged. Menubar didn't response or disappeared on Win98 after entering the options dialog. Treeview items now are translated if a language DLL is used. import and export of research plans all Site Manager entries.

download of job objective resume folders with all files and subfolders. folders with all files and subfolders can be deleted. directories can be created. Ignore firewall / proxy settings button in research outline site manager. added localization support. command line support. connects to a server. FileZilla.exe -i sitemanager.txt. imports the anne to my and loving, file sitemanager.txt into the sitemanager (or any other textfile if you want) modified the about box to research dynamically load the version information from the main application and to show the name (if using language DLL) of the translator. modified the title bar to dynamically load the version information from the main application. cleaned up some code.

improved local folder browsing. the options dialog now uses a style similar to research the one used in Netscape. (You know, the plans, nice treeview on the left side) improved the install script. up- or downloads no longer fail if a server does not understand the how to write a tma, SIZE command. Keep Alive commands were sent twice. fixed loads of minor glitches. added two LEDs on the bottom right edge of the outline plans, main window which flash when data is sent/received. now whole directories can be uploaded at once. files and directories from the write, explorer can be copied or uploaded via drag drop.

added SOCKS4/5 proxy support. it's now possible to research paper outline rename files. extended URL handling in coke vs pepsi essays the quickconnect bar and in research outline the Site Manager. cleaned up the democratic, code of the main window. changed the way the API returns information to the rest of the application. added default remote dir to Site Manager. better timeout detection. improved retry logic. completely new command system.

Much cleaner code now. better alignment in paper message log. changed command order with file download. Bradstreet? Resumed downloads were not handled correctly on some FTP servers. fixed a small file upload bug. fixed wrong tab order in Firewall settings. Firewall types got mixed up. changed the paper outline plans, Logon function: The wrong hostname was displayed if Firewalls were used.

countless small bug fixes and improvements. Added download queue Added support for links on democratic congo essay ftp sites the content of the research paper outline, status pane can be copied to resume clipboard passwords are now encrypted added disconnect, reconnect and refresh buttons added editbox to quickly see and outline plans change remote folder. Local Views updated. Job Objective Resume? Now operating through threads. Overall performance should be better now, especially with large folders. fixed bug in outline plans Site Manager. Didn't check for job objective resume multiple names in the list. fixed some icon displaying bugs fixed some minor bugs and paper outline memory leaks. Added options dialog with the connection settings Site Manager added new class (CTimeoutSocket) to resume check for timeouts break current operation button implemented added Keep Alive feature.

fixed a bug within CFtpViewCtrl::List some minor bug fixes. Ability to enter custom commands. Right-click the status pane Message log can be cleared Now displaying file date and outline time within the FTP View Added support for multiple files uploads/downloads within the API (not within the GUI yet) Implemented resume/overwrite dialog for files already existing. New method to parse the answer of the LIST command. Democratic Congo? Should be more compatible with certain FTP servers now Status bar now displays more information during transfers. Files that were uploaded/downloaded were locked for other processes during transfer.

Now read access is possible.

Write My Essay Online for Cheap -
Research paper paragraph outline pdf 1 Кб

Free Essays on My Mother Is My Hero. Hero A hero is defined as many things. While many people consider heroes to be larger than life figured, Christopher Reeves says that, A hero is an ordinary person, who preserves, and endures despite overwhelming challenges. This quote analyzes an research plans unconventional definition of speed, a hero from. Brooke Rogers Prof. Landon ENC 1102 7 March 2013 Are You My Hero ? When the paper outline, word “ hero ” comes to mind, what do you see?

A guy in write a tma, tights with a cape or a person fighting for something they believe in? A hero is someone who is research paper plans strong and friend essay, can handle anything thrown at them, willing and able and ready at. What is hero ? Hero can mean many things and can be anybody depending on how people plan to research outline, look at how to write a tma, it. In ancient Greek the concept of a hero is different from our own cultures. In ancient Greek hero is a religious figure, a dead person who received cult honors. In literature years ago they define hero. The Catalyst of My Life There’s always an agent for paper plans every renewal. The agent is the one responsible for the magnificent effect that causes a great impact into our lives. Democratic Congo? In my life there are so many dilemmas that I have encountered and I conquered all of those dilemmas because of the catalysts whom.

Hero: A Person With Courage, Integrity, and Gratitude. ?A hero is a person admired for their courage, integrity, and gratitude. This person puts away self-desires to research paper plans, make others happy in difficult situations or circumstances. There are many different types of heroes because of how one may describe the person they look to as one. A lot of times people look.

MONTESSORl MOTHER LIBRARY Brigham Young University GIFT OF . Dreams from My Father - Barack Obama. Barack Obama – “Dreams From My Father-A Story of Race and Heritance” Today I want to introduce you United States President Barack Obama’s first memoir, dreams from democratic congo, my father. It was first published in July 1995 as he was preparing to launch his political career. Research Paper Outline? Obama's March 2004 U.S. Senate Democratic. My Role Model By: Davina Britt My role model is Steve Irwin - when you hear that name, you think of that crazy guy on television who jumps. Declline of Macbeth from Noble Hero to Ruthless Tyrant. led to Macbeth fantasising about succeeding the king. If chance will have me king, why, chance may crown me without my stir. It was at this point, I believe, the once noble hero began to transform into a man possessed by research paper, his greed for power. Macbeth suspected the prophecy to be false when the.

A hero journey is the growth of someone into a better person, by research paper outline, expanding their comfort zone. This journey has three parts to it. Friend Essay For Class? First, the hero is torn away from what he/she knows and put into new territory. Next, the hero faces a number of challenges to complete in order to prove her/himself. Finally. ? My Mother , the Person I Admire the Most I admire a lot of outline, people but the person I admire the most is my mother . She cares about democratic republic essay, everyone job, but not only paper outline works also their health. Resume? She works hard every day and she likes to learn something new. She loves to go down Church at the provinces and teach Bible. Worst Day of My Life Think about the research paper, most terrifying scream you have ever heard, now intensify that by about a million times; that is the scream I was woken up by at essay, about 6:50 in the morning on April 23rd. Paper Outline Plans? This scream was coming from outside. My Best Friend Essay For Class 8? When I realized it was my mother screaming… my heart dropped.

When I began to paper outline plans, search and think about an African-American that has inspired me, my mother is the first person that comes to mind. My mother has been the biggest inspiration in my life. Everything that I am today is my best friend a result of the influence and the life lessons that she has taught me. She has made. ? A hero is usually perceived as an exceptional person set out on a quest to defeat a form of paper outline, monster for the greater good of humanity. Heroes come in many forms, their quests differ, and the monsters vary, but their intentions are always selfless.

I see my grandmother as a hero because she is an. Hero What is a hero ? There are so many different answers to this question. Everyone has their own opinoin. Coke Case Study? You can't give the title strictly to Spiderman or Batman. Not even Superman deserves to be soely called a so - called ' hero '. Wouldn't it be nice to live in a fairytale world where.

Sons Mothers Mother’s relationships, input and importance to their sons and daughters has been always a close and endearing one. For African-Americans this relationship was tested wearingly throughout American history. Research Paper? In the past many obstacles were faced by democratic republic congo essay, African-American men. Everyday Hero Now some people have hero’s that are celebrities or people who’ve made an impact or done something to charge or help out in research paper, the world, but to me my hero is friend essay for class 8 someone who I can talk to everyday about anything I feel like, someone who will laugh with me, and most important someone who. blessing. My family unlike others is small.

We enjoy spending time with each other and making memories we will cherish forever. My mother had my brother at a very young age but unlike any other teenager at her age she did what she thought it was right which was keeping my brother. Since that day my mother. ? My Hero My hero is one that is very close to me. Paper Outline Plans? My hero is the how to a tma, person that gave birth to paper plans, me. My hero is my mother . I chose my mom as my hero because to me that is what she is and more. Coke Case Study Essays? My mom is literally the backbone in research paper, the family. She takes care of everything in the family and around the house. We Need a Hero : A Look at the Eight Hero Archetypes (May 14, 1999) By Tami Cowden I have never agreed with the old saw that all romances are alike. However, I do agree there are certain similarities. Coke Vs Pepsi Study? Besides the happy ending, you can count on a romance having a terrific hero – the kind of guy.

The Concept of a Hero for Each of Everyone. ? HERO The concept of a hero can be defined in many ways. Many individuals believe to call someone a hero is to give them tremendous power. Certainly that power may be used for good, but it may also be used to paper plans, destroy individuals. Some of society’s concept of a hero goes back to their childhood figure. Macbeth: the Downfall of a Tragic Hero. Macbeth, many instances lead to write a tma, the downfall of a tragic hero . A tragic hero is research outline a character of courage and strength, who makes bad decisions that lead to tragedy. In this play, tragedy is friend 8 caused by outline plans, Macbeth and this makes him the tragic hero who causes his own downfall and democratic republic, the downfall of research outline, others.

The. enough to know someone that can make the biggest, scariest closet monsters disappear without a trace? Do you have a hero ? A hero is anne bradstreet and loving husband essay a person that influences you to better yourself. A hero should be someone who strives to make the research, world a better place to live, even by changing one person, who then will. The Positive Significant Impact of anne bradstreet and loving essay, My Mother. would love to say that my mother had a positive significant impact on research paper outline my life on job objective reasons that could stretch to A1689-zD1 but I do not. Yes, my mother had a significant impact on my life but not the positive kind.

I was born in Salisbury, North Carolina, a nice little drive away from my future home of Atlanta. Victor Frankenstein – a Byronic Hero. Victor Frankenstein – a Byronic Hero Although some critics view Victor Frankenstein as a Tragic Hero because of his one essential flaw, his overambitious desire to discover what cannot be known, he is truly a Byronic Hero by definition. Although Victor is outline plans of a higher social class than the coke vs pepsi case study, average person. Superman My grandfather was a great man. Outline? Larry Karns never fought a horrible green villain trying to take over our city, he never used fast ninja moves to how to, defeat his arch nemeses, but he did help raise two children that were not his. Paper Outline Plans? He was a hero ; he saved my life and anne bradstreet, made it possible for my sister. An epic hero is a larger than life hero who embodies the values of research outline plans, a particular society.

An epic hero is superhuman. He is braver, stronger, smarter, and cleverer than an ordinary person. Epic hero’s tend to be excellent leaders also who inspire many and how to a tma, take chances. Epic hero’s are great things for. My Mother My mother is the most important person in my life. Research Paper Outline Plans? The problem is I cannot really express how I feel about her in just words. My mother is not my whole life, but she is a really big part of it. Case Study Essays? My whole world does not only revolve around her, but she is the most influential person who inspires.

John Proctor as a Tragic Hero. The Crucible. John Proctor as a Tragic Hero In Arthur Miller’s The Crucible, a husband, John Proctor, deals with the traumatic stress of his wife, Elizabeth, and the accusations of research paper outline, witchcraft pressed onto her. John Proctor is put face-to-face with the men of the court; while righteously defending his family. Aaron Upright English Period One. A. Departure: My hero , is one that was born a hero . Speed Research? Albert Hall, was a young boy when he first realized something was different. Paper Outline Plans? He became to realize that people were talking to paper, him, but with out moving lips. He was a mind reader, one of great traits. Albert became. dedicated to my dad and research outline plans, he will never read it.

Sad thing.* When I was 16 I had to write an essay in school about the person I admire the most. So I wrote about my dad. Anne Husband Essay? My dad is not famous, nor is he rich or talented. He is not a scientist or a professor. But he is the best man in my personal world.

?KCC Mr. Crider Summer Bridge July 19, 2013 My Hero It gets me through Last year, I went through the research, hardest things I've ever been faced with in my life. Research Paper? I lost my grandpa and two months later I lost my aunt and soon after our home was foreclosed on. This left me thinking, Is this. Have you ever wondered what a true hero is like? When people say hero , they usually think of cartoon characters like Superman, Spiderman, or SpongeBob. But for me, I will think of my mom.

My mom is caring, encouraging, and she loves me. I won’t be able to make it to today if she had never taught me all. Poem Analysis: Walt Whitman's O Captain My Captain and Langston Hughes' Mother to Son. ? Poem Analysis Although the research paper, two poems portray two very different styles of coke case study, writing, Walt Whitman's “O Captain! My Captain!” And “ Mother to Son,” by Langston Hughes, do share some similarities. Both poems use stylistic devices such as figurative language, metaphors, and research paper plans, rhythm to convey their.

an epic hero of the job objective resume, poem entitled Beowulf, a composition from the Anglo-Saxon literature set in the 6th century. He was the strongest and paper, most powerful warrior of the Geats and job objective, a nephew of King Higlac. In the research plans, poem, he defeated Grendel, a monster who is a descendant of Cain, Grendel's mother , and a fire-breathing. Madeline Kepics November 24, 2008 English My Big Robotic Hero Things were not looking good for their planet, so to save the job objective, rest of plans, them, he and a steady crew went across the resume, galaxies to paper outline, get precious energon they needed to help their cause. Job Objective Resume? However, the research outline, Decepticons were relentless in their pursuit. Alcoholism and how it Affected Me I was 4 years old when I realized my mother was an alcoholic. I can remember walking home from school with my older brother just hoping she was not passed out already. I never knew how it affected me until now. Speed Research? Alcoholism is a family disease and most people. The Romantic Hero is one which can evoke many criticisms and opinions.

Unique aspects to this character is why this hero seems to be so uniquely attractive, yet disturbing. The embodiment of the Romantic Hero comes through Heathcliff in Wuthering Heights written by research plans, Emily Bronte. Speed Research Paper? Some aspects attributed. A Different Hero When has it ever occurred to a hero to boast about triumph when it is other people he is helping? Beowulf is the subject of the epic poem that is named after him. Beowulf is a larger than life warrior who lives in a society that is Anglo-Saxon. One important belief is that a warrior.

The Odyssey - the Unnoticeable Hero. Unnoticeable Hero In most epics, the hero seems to die at paper outline plans, some point during the case essays, story. Research Paper Outline? In The Odyssey, Odysseus encounters many trials and tribulations throughout his journey back to his native land of Ithaca, however he never ends up meeting a pleasant or even a cruel death. Job Objective? Is the passing of the outline, hero , Odysseus. though a hero is defined by his actions, not his words, it doesn’t mean that his words don’t speak louder than his actions. My parents can be considered heroes as well.

My parents have always cared for me and my best for class 8, protected me from harmful things. They made sure that I always had a roof over my head and. My Heroes “ My Heroes” was written by Elizabeth Berg, who has published many popular books since 1993. In the article, Berg told us that real heroes were ordinary people around us. Because Berg’s daughter chose her friend as a hero who saved her from drowning in a creek, Berg realized a hero wouldn’t. at the time but one who learned from the different places he has been and left even a mark there. Dr. Outline Plans? Jose P. Rizal is the Philippine’s National Hero . Case Study Essays? He was born June 18, 1861 and research outline, died by firing squad at Luneta Bagumbayan in December 30, 1896. He is academician, a linguist, writer, historian,scientist. In the other story “Antigone”, Creon is the essay 8, tragic hero that received the most hardships and sufferings.

Despite how much Oedipus may have obtained for research paper outline plans the decision he made, it has been strongly suggested that Creon is definitely the more tragic hero than Oedipus by vs pepsi, analyzing the research, intensity and amount. Beowulf the Epic Hero What does it mean to be a hero ? Like anything else in this world, the to my and loving, definition of the outline, word hero can be argued. Speed Research? Some may say that a hero can be passive, that is if he or she refrains from doing a certain action it makes them heroic. Others would argue that to be truly heroic. definition of a hero is, “A mythological or legendary figure of paper outline plans, great strength or ability” (Merriam-Webster, 1997), and coke essays, while that may be true, what may be one’s idea of a hero may not constitute someone else’s idea of research outline plans, a hero . My definition of a hero is someone that gives selflessly, speak to my soul, touch. billionaire alter-ego, Bruce Wayne. Anne To My Dear Husband? In this third installment of Christopher Nolan’s Batman films, Bruce Wayne no longer feels that the City of Gotham needs a hero and goes on a secluded hiatus. However, when a new villain, Bane (Tom Hardy), threatens Gotham City, Wayne dons his cape and mask once more.

Review. Family Analysis Paper from Family Interventions both formal and informal. Research Paper Outline Plans? Introduction: My family shows signs of being a healthy family for the most part with a few exceptions. The biggest exception is essays that the individuals are not assigned to research outline plans, particular roles. My Best Friend Essay? This means that our roles. My Hero Eyes full of anger, face flustered with intense confusion, she screamed, “Rayburn! What do you think you are doing?” “I’m claiming this for myself.” I jokingly said with a mischievous grin. Research Paper Outline Plans? I knew beforehand that she would be angry, but I didn’t care I just wanted to see her reaction.

qualities of a hero mean? Its simple qualities of a hero are what make a hero to become a special person for someone out there in resume, the world. Research Outline Plans? Stockton’s “The Griffin amp; The Minor Canon” amp; Stone’s “Where I Find My Heroes” provide what are the qualities of a hero . Also does Mariah Carey’s “ Hero ” and republic essay, Bulfinch’s. The Person Who Has Made a Difference in My Life: My Mother. Difference in My Life: My Mother My mother is the most influential person in my life. She has taught me various things in life and paper outline, her endless support has made a difference in my life. One thing I have learned from her is how to have a successful business. Growing up and seeing my mom owning and.

He Was My Hero My hero has always been my grandfather. I prefer not to use his name in anne to my and loving husband, respect. He was always spoiling me and always taking me places that he had never taken me before. Paper Plans? He taught me many life lessons. ? My Life Nikole Smith PSY 202 Chavonne McCall April 17, 2011 My Life Outline 1.What My Family Is Like A..Many Nationalities . means to be a hero . Now write about one of your heroes, explaining what this person had done to congo, make them a hero in your eyes. A hero involves not only research outline plans about courage, noble deeds, and democratic republic, outstanding achievements, but also the research outline plans, bravery to make difference and a heart full of love. My hero is Dr. Jose P. Heroes: Hero and Good Moral Character. ? Last 1 First Last ENG 122 Professor Blank 24 Jan 14 A Hero Lies in All of Us? The dictionary refers to a hero as someone who is admired for anne dear essay his deeds, abilities or noble qualities.

This could include anyone for anything! Today there are so many people that are considered heroes. it was three years ago when we won, Manning said. I know the people of New Orleans and the Saints have that same feeling right now. Hartley, the hero of the NFC title game with his 40-yard field goal in OT, made a 47-yarder later in the third quarter. Research Outline? After Matt Stover was wide left on a 51-yarder. Who is your hero ? This question often evokes a number of responses. The typical answer follows the cliched format of how to write, “ my mother ”, “ my father”, or that famous celebrity always seen on television.

This type of knee-jerk reaction stems from the idea that a hero is someone who is universally inspirational. Technical Writing “ My Great Teacher also My Hero ” Objective/Purpose: To inspire and encourage many of plans, us, also cheers us up to “Keep Looking Forward”. Description of Lesson: A teacher (also called a schoolteacher) is a person who provides education for students. I decided to start my compilation with. ?Hermann Ajong College Writing I 1201 13 Shih-Kneel, Nancy Family Essay Date: 09-27-2013 Hero in 8, my world Where would I have been without you mother ? Destiny gives us opportunities to meet new people in our lives. Each one bringing a unique flavor, molding us into research outline, what we will become.

There is. Roda 09/08/09 Mr. Brunson My “perfect” family was shattered by a series of catastrophes beginning with my grandfathers’ death. That same day, Elizabeth ran away from home. My Best Friend? Then, that same week, Norberto got deployed to Iraq.

In that same month, Dayana and my mom got diagnosed with psoriasis.