## Facts

- Michael Wayne Howell and his girlfriend, Mona Lisa Watson, stole a truck from Howell’s former employer and later robbed a 7‑Eleven in Memphis.
- During the robbery, store clerk Alvin Kennedy was shot and killed.
- Howell and Watson fled out of state, abandoned and burned the stolen truck in Oklahoma, and later became involved in additional violent crimes.
- Howell was ultimately arrested in Florida after a chase and shootout; a handgun recovered from the vehicle was ballistically linked to the Kennedy killing.
- Watson testified at an Oklahoma preliminary hearing in a separate prosecution; Howell’s counsel cross-examined her there about the Tennessee robbery and homicide.
- Watson did not testify at the Tennessee trial; the trial court admitted her prior Oklahoma testimony over Howell’s Confrontation Clause objection.
- A Memphis jury convicted Howell of grand larceny and first-degree felony murder, acquitted him of premeditated first-degree murder, and sentenced him to death based on two statutory aggravating circumstances.

## Issues

1. Whether admitting Watson’s prior testimony from an out-of-state preliminary hearing at Howell’s Tennessee capital trial violated the Sixth Amendment and state constitutional right of confrontation.
2. Whether use of the felony-murder aggravating circumstance in a felony-murder case was invalid under Middlebrooks, and, if so, whether the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

## Decision

- The court affirmed Howell’s convictions for grand larceny and first-degree felony murder.
- The court held that admission of Watson’s preliminary-hearing testimony did not violate confrontation rights because Watson was unavailable and Howell previously had a full and fair opportunity to cross-examine her on relevant matters.
- Applying Middlebrooks, the court invalidated the “murder committed while engaged in committing a felony” aggravator as duplicative in a felony-murder case.
- The court nevertheless affirmed the death sentence, holding the jury’s consideration of the invalid aggravator was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt in light of the remaining valid aggravator (prior violent felony conviction) and the sentencing record.

## Legal Principles

- Former testimony may be admitted without violating confrontation rights when the witness is unavailable and the defendant previously had a meaningful opportunity to cross-examine the witness on substantially similar issues.
- Cross-examination at an earlier proceeding in another jurisdiction can satisfy confrontation requirements if it was adversarial and adequately addressed the relevant subject matter.
- In felony-murder cases, an aggravating circumstance that merely repeats the elements of felony murder fails to perform the required narrowing function and is constitutionally invalid.
- A capital sentencing verdict may be affirmed despite submission of an invalid aggravating circumstance if the reviewing court concludes beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not contribute to the death sentence.

## Conclusion

The Tennessee Supreme Court upheld Howell’s felony-murder and larceny convictions and affirmed the death sentence, ruling that prior cross-examined preliminary-hearing testimony was admissible due to witness unavailability and that the improper felony-murder aggravator was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given the remaining valid aggravator and the absence of substantial mitigating proof.


State v. Howell, 868 S.W.2d 238 (Tenn. 1993)