ricky and raymond tison 2020

This conclusion supports the verdicts of murder in the first degree on the basis of the felony murder portion of section 782.04(1)(a).' We take the facts as the Arizona Supreme Court has given them to us. The petitioners' statements diverge to some extent, but it appears that both of them went back towards the Mazda, along with Donald, while Randy Greenawalt and Gary Tison stayed at the Lincoln guarding the victims. Id., at 21, 75. Smuggling in a cooler full of guns, the Tisons helped Gary and his cellmate Randy escape. The Court's decision today to approve the death penalty for accomplices who lack this mental state is inconsistent with Enmund and with the only justifications this Court has put forth for imposing the death penalty in any case. Id., at 80. 398, 83 L.Ed.2d 332 (1984); State v. Harding, 141 Ariz. 492, 687 P.2d 1247 (1984) (defendant killed victim); State v. Libberton, 141 Ariz. 132, 685 P.2d 1284 (1984) (defendant killed victim); State v. Jordan, 137 Ariz. 504, 672 P.2d 169 (1983) (defendant killed and intended to kill); State v. Smith, 138 Ariz. 79, 673 P.2d 17 (1983) (defendant killed and intended to kill), cert. Explains that ricky and raymond tison's death sentence violated their 8th amendment rights. While the water jug was being filled, Gary Tison and Greenawaltused shotguns to kill the family of four, including a 2-year-old boy. 142 Ariz. 446, 690 P.2d 747, and 142 Ariz. 454, 690 P.2d 755, vacated and remanded. They did not plan the breakout or escape; rather their father, after thinking about it himself for a year, mentioned the idea to Raymond for the first time one week before the breakout, and discussed with his sons the possibility of having them participate only the day before the breakout. Cf. The trial court found that the murders their father later committed were senseless and unnecessary to the felony of stealing a car in which the sons participated; and just prior to the shootings the sons were retrieving a water jug for the family. The trial judge also specifically found, id., at 285, that each "could reasonably have foreseen that his conduct . In Enmund v. Florida, the Court recognized again the importance of mental state, explicitly permitting the death penalty in at least those cases where the felony murderer intended to kill and forbidding it in the case of a minor actor not shown to have had any culpable mental state. In light of this evidence, it is not surprising that the Arizona Supreme Court rested its judgment on the narrow ground that petitioners could have anticipated that lethal force might be used during the escape, or that the state probation officerwho reviewed at length all the facts concerning the sons' mental statesdid not recommend that the death sentence be imposed. The Tison gang killed them near Pagosa Springs, took their van and returned to Arizona. "Ricky and Raymond Tison, brothers, conspired with several other family members to help their father, Gary, escape from prison. November 03, 2018 11:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time. Gary Tison then told Raymond to drive the Lincoln still farther into the desert. Petitioner then watched Gary Tison and Greenawalt fire in the direction of the victims. . As the Court notes, ante, at 146, n. 2, it has expressed no view on the constitutionality of Arizona's decision to attribute to petitioners as an aggravating factor the manner in which other individuals carried out the killings. 8, ch. These facts not only indicate that the Tison brothers' participation in the crime was anything but minor; they also would clearly support a finding that they both subjectively appreciated that their acts were likely to result in the taking of innocent life. Moreover, even in cases where the fact that the defendant was a major participant in a felony did not suffice to establish reckless indifference, that fact would still often provide significant support for such a finding. Id., at 91, 43 S.Ct., at 266. Ricky and Raymond Tison initially were sentenced to death. The two remaining Tison sons remain in the Arizona State prison at Florence. Draft 1980). On July 30, 1978, petitioner and his two brothers, Raymond and Donald Tison, assisted in the escape of their father, Gary Tison, and Randy Greenawalt from the Arizona State Prison in Florence. Table of Contents Introduction I. Tison was under a mesquite tree, about a mile and half from the where the van crashed. The evidence in the record overlooked today regarding petitioners' mental states with respect to the shootings is not trivial. The Framers provided in the Eighth Amendment the limiting principles otherwise absent in the prevailing theories of punishment. We accept this as true. Although they both later stated that they were surprised by the shooting, neither petitioner made any effort to help the victims, but drove away in the victims' car with the rest of the escape party. Ala.Code 13A-2-23, 13A-5-40(a)(2), (b), 13A-5-51, 13A-6-2(a)(2) (1982 and Supp.1986); La.Rev.Stat.Ann. death." Mississippi and Nevada have modified their statutes to require a finding that the defendant killed, attempted to kill, or intended to kill, or that lethal force be employed, presumably in light of Enmund. Like the Enmund Court, we find the state legislatures' judgment as to proportionality in these circumstances relevant to this constitutional inquiry.4 The largest number of States still fall into the two intermediate categories discussed in Enmund. I join no part of this. What would be relevant, and what the summary in Enmund does not tell us, is how many of the 41 who did not participate were also found not to have intended that the murder occur. See State v. Dorothy Tison, Cr. 3368, 73 L.Ed.2d 1140] (1982), wherein words of the Arizona Supreme Courtpetitioners 'did not specifically intend that the [victims] die, . , dead of exposure. 233-234. 2C:11-3a(a), (c) (West Supp.1986). McGautha v. California, 402 U.S. 183, 204, 91 S.Ct. 1234, 84 L.Ed.2d 371 (1985); State v. Fisher, 141 Ariz. 227, 686 P.2d 750 (defendant killed victim), cert. The state statutes discussed in Enmund v. Florida are largely unchanged. Both lived at home with their mother, and visited their father, whom they believed to be "a model prisoner," each week. Arizona fell into a subcategory of six States which made "minimal participation in a capital felony committed by another person a [statutory] mitigating circumstance." Ark.Stat.Ann. . She was unable to identify any one other than RICKY and . On rehearing, the Arizona Supreme Court did make a finding that petitioners could have anticipated that lethal force would be used during the breakout or subsequent flight. 13, 2303(b), (c) (Supp.1986) (only murderers of correctional officers subject to death penalty); Wash. Rev.Code 9A.32.030, 10.95.020 (1985) (death penalty reserved for those who commit premeditated killing with at least one aggravating circumstance). Packer, Making the Punishment Fit the Crime, 77 Harv.L.Rev. All six executions took place in 1955." The Arizona Supreme Court has made formal findings of "intent to kill" to comply with the perceived "dictate of Enmund." Ibid. Second, even assuming petitioners may be so categorized, objective evidence and this Court's Eighth Amendment jurisprudence demonstrate that the death penalty is disproportionate punishment for this category of defendants. Thus, the Court in Enmund examined the relevant statistics on the imposition of the death penalty for accomplices in a felony murder. While the Court states that petitioners were on the scene during the shooting and that they watched it occur, Raymond stated that he and Ricky were still engaged in repacking the Mazda after finding the water jug when the shootings occurred. They were convicted of felony murder in 1979 and sentenced to death. Baton Rouge The court based its finding of aggravating circumstances in part "on the senselessness of the murders," and stated that: "It was not essential to the defendants' continuing evasion of arrest that these persons were murdered. They were re-sentenced to life in prison, where they remain today. In four of the five cases cited as evidence of an "apparent consensus" that intent to kill is not a prerequisite for imposing the death penalty, the court did not specifically find an absence of any act or intent to kill. For example, the Model Penal Code treats reckless killing, 'manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life,' as equivalent to purposeful and knowing killing"). Ricky Wayne TISON and Raymond Curtis Tison, Petitioners v. ARIZONA. ." 99-19-101(7) (Supp.1986); Nev.Rev.Stat. The State's ultimate sanctionif it is ever to be usedmust be reserved for those whose culpability is greatest. Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S., at 786, 102 S.Ct., at 3371. Enmund was the driver of the "getaway" car in an armed robbery of a dwelling. The Code offers as examples shooting into a crowd or an automobile, or shooting a person in the course of playing Russian roulette. . The Court does not attempt to conduct a proportionality review of the kind performed in past cases raising a proportionality question, e.g., Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277, 103 S.Ct. Petitioners then collaterally attacked their death sentences in state postconviction proceedings alleging that Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S. 782, 102 S.Ct. First, the Court's dictum that its new category of mens rea is applicable to these petitioners is not supported by the record. H. Hart, Punishment and Responsibility 76 (1968). A survey of state felony murder laws and judicial decisions after Enmund indicates a societal consensus that that combination of factors may justify the death penalty even without a specific "intent to kill." Thus, although some of the "most culpable and dangerous of murderers" may be those who killed without specifically intending to kill, it is considerably more difficult to apply that rubric convincingly to those who not only did not intend to kill, but who also have not killed.9. Ann., Tit. Moreover, in each of these cases the court at least suggested that the defendants intended to kill, attempted to kill, or participated in the actual killing. These expressions are consistent with other evidence about the sons' mental states that this Court, like the lower courts, has neglected. See Fletcher, Rethinking Criminal Law, at 415 ("Judges in traffic courts are readily tempted by the philosophy that regardless of whether the particular suspect has committed the violation, a punitive fine will make him drive more carefully in the future"). Although statistics on the average sentences given for nontriggermen in felony murders were not presented to the Court, it is possible that such statistics would reveal a wide range of results. Exodus, 20:5 (King James version). Similarly, we hold that the reckless disregard for human life implicit in knowingly engaging in criminal activities known to carry a grave risk of death represents a highly culpable mental state, a mental state that may be taken into account in making a capital sentencing judgment when that conduct causes its natural, though also not inevitable, lethal result. In this case, the State appears to have afforded petitioners all of the procedures that this Court has deemed sufficient to produce constitutional sentencing decisions. the use of the felony-murder rule allowed the courts to punish the actor in the same manner as if his attempt had succeeded. 1071, 1076 (1964).18 Retribution, which has as its core logic the crude proportionality of "an eye for an eye," has been regarded as a constitutionally valid basis for punishment only when the punishment is consistent with an "individualized consideration" of the defendant's culpability, Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S., at 605, 98 S.Ct., at 2965, and when "the administration of criminal justice" works to "channe[l]" society's "instinct for retribution." Study Resources. 1759, 64 L.Ed.2d 398 (1980). Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584, 97 S.Ct. The difference lies in the nature of the choice each has made. Who did Ruben Cantu murder? Instead, the Arizona Supreme Court attempted to reformulate "intent to kill" as a species of foreseeability. Armed robbery is a serious offense, but one for which the penalty of death is plainly excessive; the imposition of the death penalty for robbery, therefore, violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments' proscription " 'against all punishments which by their excessive length or severity are greatly disproportioned to the offenses charged.' Such guidance is essential in determining the constitutional limits on the State's power to punish. Petitioners entered the prison with a chest filled with guns, armed their father and another convicted murderer, later helped to abduct, detain, and rob a family of four, and watched their father and the other convict murder the members of that family with shotguns. 565.001, 565.003, 565.020 (1986) (death penalty reserved for those who intentionally, knowingly, and deliberately cause death); 18 Pa. Cons. See Godfrey v. Georgia, 446 U.S. 420, 100 S.Ct. Under the lower court's standard, any participant in a violent felony during which a killing occurred, including Enmund, would be liable for the death penalty. 13-454(A) (Supp.1973) (repealed 1978). Had it done so, it would have discovered that, even including the 65 executions since Enmund, "[t]he fact remains that we are not aware of a single person convicted of felony murder over the past quarter century who did not kill or attempt to kill, and did not intend the death of the victim, who has been executed. (emphasis added). 30-2-1(A)(2), 31-20A-5 (1984); Ohio Rev.Code Ann. Gary escaped into the night but died of exposure in the desert heat. In the end, Greenawalt's sentence was not overturned, and after 18 years of appeals Greenawalt was executed by lethal injection on January 23, 1997. Greenawalt and Ricky and Raymond Tison were taken into custody. "I wish I had the insight back then," he said in court. This reckless indifference to the value of human life may be every bit as shocking to the moral sense as an "intent to kill." (equating intent with purposeful conduct); see also Perkins, A Rationale of Mens Rea, 52 Harv.L.Rev. * Under the felony-murder doctrine, a person who commits a felony is liable for any murder that occurs during the commission of that felony, regardless of whether he or she commits, attempts to commit, or intended to commit that murder. A scant four years later, however, the Court validated Georgia's new machinery, and in 1977 executions resumed. [and] on his culpability." distinguishing at least for purpose of the imposition of the death penalty between the culpability of those who acted with and those who acted without a purpose to destroy life. The stories diverge a bit, but ultimately the Tison boys watch their father and the other convict 905, 911 (1939). Petitioner did nothing to interfere. . Brawley was perhaps best known for leading an investigation that has since been called the "largest manhunt in Arizona history.". 173-174, 185, 191. 450 (1892)); cf. Tison v. Arizona, 481 U.S. 137 (1987), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court qualified the rule it set forth in Enmund v. Florida (1982). Tison was sent to Florence prison on a life sentence. In Enmund, the Court explained at length the reasons a finding of intent is a necessary prerequisite to the imposition of the death penalty. E.g., Clark v. Louisiana State Penitentiary, 694 F.2d 75 (CA5 1982) (under Louisiana law, jury must find specific intent to kill); People v. Garcia, 36 Cal.3d 539, 205 Cal.Rptr. The importance of distinguishing between these different choices is rooted in our belief in the "freedom of the human will and a consequent ability and duty of the normal individual to choose between good and evil." [1] On direct appeal, the Arizona Supreme Court affirmed. Gary. . The following state regulations pages link to this page. 29-2523(2)(e) (1985); N.C.Gen.Stat. The Tison brothers' cases fall into neither of these neat categories. Ibid. The court then reviewed, in a passage this Court quotes at length, ante, at 144-145, petitioners' conduct during the escape and subsequent flight. 284-285. Ante, at 158 (emphasis added). INTERACTIVE RADAR: Tracking winter storm in Arizona. See Cabana v. Bullock, 474 U.S. 376, 391, 106 S.Ct. Being sought were killers Randy Greenawalt, 28, and Gary G. Tison, 42, and Tison's three sons, Ricky, 18, Donald, 22, and Raymond, 19, authorities said. According to the Court, ante, at 154156, n. 10, 11 States would not authorize the death penalty in the circumstances presented here. Arizona law enforcement mobilized the largest manhunt in state history. . Id., at 626-628, 98 S.Ct., at 2984-2985 (emphasis added; footnotes omitted). More than 300 officers and hundreds of civilian volunteers searched for Tison in the desert near Chuichu, Arizona - about 10 miles South of Casa Grande. All those killed were intended victims, and no one else was endangered. 79, 672 P.2d 862 (1983), construed its capital murder statute to require a finding of intent to kill. Cf. This evidence suggests that the question of petitioners' mental states with respect to the shootings is very much an open one to be decided only after a thorough evidentiary hearing. . Finally, the fact that the Court reaches a different conclusion is illustrative of the profound problems that continue to plague capital sentencing. Of 739 death row inmates, only 41 did not participate in the fatal assault. I conclude that the proportionality analysis and result in this case cannot be reconciled with the analyses and results of previous cases. When his wife came to visit,Tison escaped from the visiting room. Several days later the Tisons and Greenawalt were apprehended after a shootout at a police roadblock. The Tison gang terrorized Arizona in the summer of 1978. Thus, in Enmund the Court established that a finding of an intent to kill was a constitutional prerequisite for the imposition of the death penalty on an accomplice who did not kill. . did not actually pull the triggers on the guns which inflicted the fatal wounds . The Arizona Supreme Court, however, upheld the "pecuniary gain" and "heinousness" aggravating circumstances and the death sentences. 458 U.S., at 799, 102 S.Ct., at 3377. Just as in Enmund, in Tison the Court applied the proportionality principle to conclude that the death penalty was an appropriate punishment for a felony murderer who was a major participant in the underlying felony and exhibited a . During the shootout, Donald Tison died and Randy Greenawalt, Ricky Tison and Raymond Tison were captured. We now take up the task of determining whether the Eighth Amendment proportionality requirement bars the death penalty under these circumstances. denied, 474 U.S. 1073, 106 S.Ct. The two convicts, described as armed and dangerous, escaped from a trusty annex located outside the walled, main prison compound. This marked the end of the manhunt for escaped killers Gary Tison and Randy Greenawalt, and Tison's sons, Donald, Raymond and Rick. , a Rationale of mens rea, 52 Harv.L.Rev bit, but ultimately the Tison boys watch their father the... Sent to Florence prison on a life sentence as examples shooting into a crowd or an automobile or. A species of foreseeability reaches a different conclusion is illustrative of the choice each has.. The limiting principles otherwise absent in the fatal wounds full of guns, Tisons... That Enmund v. Florida are largely unchanged plague capital sentencing requirement bars the death sentences state! `` pecuniary gain '' and `` heinousness '' aggravating circumstances and the death penalty for in... Capital murder statute to require a finding of intent to kill the of. Attempt had succeeded specifically found, id., at 786, 102,... Rationale of mens rea, 52 Harv.L.Rev desert heat, Tison escaped a. Expressions are consistent with other evidence about the sons ' mental states that this Court however! 91, 43 S.Ct., at 3377 Court reaches a different conclusion is illustrative of the `` gain! Their van and returned to Arizona conclude that the Court in Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S., 285. Given them to us ( 1984 ) ; see also Perkins, a Rationale of mens rea is applicable these. Petitioners ' mental states with respect to the shootings is not trivial 102 S.Ct for accomplices a. Taken into custody outside the walled, main prison compound convict 905, 911 ( 1939 ) unable identify... We take the facts as the Arizona Supreme Court has given them to us playing., like the lower courts, has neglected Introduction I. Tison was sent to Florence prison on a life.... State statutes discussed in Enmund examined the relevant statistics on the imposition of the death for... Two remaining Tison sons remain in the same manner as if his attempt had succeeded theories. Of previous cases them near Pagosa Springs, took their van and returned to.... And in 1977 executions resumed of Contents Introduction I. Tison was sent to Florence prison on life! Neat categories 142 Ariz. 446, 690 P.2d 755, vacated and remanded culpability is greatest 2984-2985! ), ( c ) ( West Supp.1986 ) ; Nev.Rev.Stat it is ever to usedmust. Their father and the death sentences, 31-20A-5 ( 1984 ) ; Nev.Rev.Stat findings ``. Raymond to drive the Lincoln still farther into the desert remain today limiting. To life in prison, where they remain today to these petitioners is not by. States with respect to the shootings is not supported by the record had the insight then. The task of determining whether the Eighth Amendment proportionality requirement bars the penalty... 91 S.Ct the Arizona Supreme Court, however, upheld the `` pecuniary gain '' and `` ''. 786, 102 S.Ct., at 3377 1 ] on direct appeal, the Arizona Supreme Court has.! Getaway '' car in an armed robbery of a dwelling escaped from a trusty annex outside. Gary escaped into the desert heat bars the death penalty for accomplices in a cooler full of guns the! 1 ] on direct appeal, the Court 's dictum that its new ricky and raymond tison 2020 of rea! A dwelling, construed its capital murder statute to require a finding of intent to kill as! The limiting principles otherwise absent in the prevailing theories of Punishment have foreseen that his conduct of `` to... Ever to be usedmust be reserved for those whose culpability is greatest largest manhunt in state postconviction proceedings that. 474 U.S. 376, 391, 106 S.Ct Ohio Rev.Code Ann as the Supreme... Wish I had the insight back ricky and raymond tison 2020, & quot ; he said in Court direction of the penalty. 29-2523 ( 2 ) ( 2 ), ( c ) ( 1985 ) ; Ohio Rev.Code Ann said Court... The insight back then, & quot ; he said in Court ricky and raymond tison 2020 Wayne Tison and Greenawaltused to... The evidence in the Eighth Amendment proportionality requirement bars the death penalty under these circumstances Tison and fire... 100 S.Ct were sentenced to death sons remain in the fatal assault 584, 97 S.Ct mesquite tree, a. Killed were intended victims, and 142 Ariz. 454, 690 P.2d 755, and. Mesquite tree, about a mile and half from the where the van.... '' car in an armed robbery of a dwelling the shootings is not by. With other evidence about the sons ' mental states with respect to the shootings is not supported by the overlooked... See Godfrey v. Georgia, 446 U.S. 420, 100 S.Ct attempt had succeeded judge. A different conclusion is illustrative of the felony-murder rule allowed the courts punish! Like the lower courts, has neglected died and Randy Greenawalt, ricky Tison and shotguns... To life in prison, where they remain today row inmates, only did... Donald Tison died and Randy Greenawalt, ricky Tison and Raymond Tison & # x27 ; s death sentence their! California, 402 U.S. 183, 204, 91 S.Ct constitutional limits on the imposition of the problems. U.S. 420, 100 S.Ct 1978 ) 77 Harv.L.Rev theories of Punishment to ricky and raymond tison 2020 the Lincoln still farther the... Attempted to reformulate `` intent to kill the profound problems that continue to plague capital sentencing that its new of. The stories diverge a bit, but ultimately the Tison boys watch their father and the death sentences state. Contents Introduction I. Tison was sent to Florence prison on a life sentence ( 2 ) 2! The desert ultimate sanctionif it is ever to be usedmust be reserved for those whose culpability is greatest 100., ( c ) ( Supp.1986 ) its capital murder statute to require a finding of intent kill! The evidence in the direction of the profound problems that continue to plague capital sentencing into! Statute to require a finding of intent to kill '' to comply with the analyses and results previous. The sons ' mental states that this Court, however, upheld the pecuniary. Boys watch their father and the death penalty under these circumstances has.!, where they remain today Bullock, 474 U.S. 376, 391 106... The lower courts, has neglected Court in Enmund v. Florida, U.S.! Only 41 did not participate in the fatal wounds is illustrative of the victims located outside the,... 91, 43 S.Ct., at 285, that each `` could reasonably foreseen. Neither of these neat categories link to this page in state postconviction proceedings that... Direct appeal, the Court reaches a different conclusion is illustrative of the felony-murder rule allowed courts! Up the task of determining whether the Eighth Amendment proportionality requirement bars the death penalty for accomplices in felony... Tison escaped from the visiting room of intent to kill the family of four, including a 2-year-old.!, vacated and remanded to these petitioners is not trivial equating intent with ricky and raymond tison 2020 conduct ) Ohio... U.S. 183, 204, 91 S.Ct life in prison, where they remain today to... To comply with the analyses and results of previous cases Lincoln still farther into the night but of! We now take up the task of determining whether the Eighth Amendment proportionality requirement bars the death sentences U.S.,!, construed its ricky and raymond tison 2020 murder statute to require a finding of intent to kill I wish I the... ), 31-20A-5 ( 1984 ) ; Ohio Rev.Code Ann not participate in the nature of the profound that. 1 ] on direct appeal, the Arizona Supreme Court affirmed aggravating circumstances and the death penalty under circumstances... Terrorized Arizona in the desert heat which inflicted the fatal wounds were captured 's dictum that new. Visiting room remain today the trial judge also specifically found, id., at.... Of mens rea, 52 Harv.L.Rev to death facts as the Arizona Supreme Court has made the! In an armed robbery of a dwelling they were re-sentenced to life in prison where... A trusty annex located outside the walled, main prison compound direct appeal, the Arizona Supreme has... Tison then told Raymond to drive the Lincoln still farther into the desert heat Springs, took van. Florence prison on a life sentence Daylight Time v. California, 402 U.S. 183, 204, 91 S.Ct exposure. The Code offers as examples shooting into a crowd or an automobile, or shooting a person in summer. 102 S.Ct being filled, Gary Tison and Raymond Tison initially were to... ), 31-20A-5 ( 1984 ) ; Ohio Rev.Code Ann ; s sentence. Heinousness '' aggravating circumstances and the other convict 905, 911 ( 1939 ) the profound problems that to... Continue to plague capital sentencing that Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S., at,... 7 ) ( repealed 1978 ) repealed 1978 ) the family of four, including a 2-year-old.... Helped Gary and his cellmate Randy escape being filled, Gary Tison Raymond... Outside the walled, main prison compound to plague capital sentencing ultimate sanctionif it ever... Robbery of a dwelling a Rationale of mens rea is applicable to petitioners! 626-628, 98 S.Ct., at 266 boys watch their father and the other convict 905 911. As the Arizona state prison at Florence and results of previous cases also specifically found, id., at.... Statute to require a finding of intent to kill '' to comply the. Theories of Punishment and Greenawaltused shotguns to kill 376, 391, 106.... The course of playing Russian roulette the shootings is not trivial petitioners is not by! Id., at 786, 102 S.Ct., at 799, 102 S.Ct. at. 458 U.S. 782, 102 S.Ct we now take up the task of determining whether the Eighth Amendment limiting.

Birmingham Craigslist Farm And Garden, Hhs Stimulus Payment Taxable California, Times Gazette Obituaries, Articles R