 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Keats v. State2/13/2003
nded to the 911 call. His actions, nevertheless, placed them all in great danger. That is exactly the type of conduct that can be characterized as being "without legal justification or excuse."
OTHER ISSUES
[ ] Appellant asserts that because first-degree arson contains an element of specific intent and appellant argued at trial that he ultimately intended to commit suicide, the district court improperly excluded evidence that law enforcement took appellant into custody pursuant to Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 25-10-101 through 25-10-127, the statutory procedures utilized to place a mentally ill person in emergency detention. Appellant's contention is that his specific intent being the intent to kill himself, he did not have the specific intent to commit first-degree arson. Aside from citing summarily to the referenced statutes, appellant does not otherwise cite to any legal authority in advancing this argument. Appellant further contends that the district court's jury instruction that "ownership or title to an occupied structure is not a defense to First Degree Arson" improperly precluded the jury from considering appellant's ownership of the occupied structure for other proper purposes. This argument consists of two paragraphs, neither of which cite to any supporting legal authority.
[ ] "We have repeatedly stated that arguments that are not . . . supported by pertinent citations to authority will not be considered." Eustice v. State, 11 P.3d 897, 904 (Wyo. 2000).
CONCLUSION
[ ] The district court did not err in refusing to give the appellant's proposed jury instructions regarding specific intent and malice. The appellant's other arguments have not been supported by cogent reasoning or pertinent authority. The judgment and sentence of the district court is affirmed.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Wyoming DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|