 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Owens4/10/2002
examination and findings. The photographs of the victim's face assisted with Ross' identification. The presence of fly eggs helped establish the time of death. Owens' stipulation to these facts did not relieve the State of its burden of proving the necessary elements of the alleged offense. The State is not bound by this type of defense offer to stipulate to facts. State v. Eagle Star, 1996 SD 143, , 558 NW2d 70, 75-76; State v. Muetze, 368 NW2d 575, 586 (SD 1985). Therefore, the photographs were admissible to establish identity and time of death.
[ .] Owens also objected to photographs which depicted trauma to the victim's mouth. Owens, however, denied acting with criminal intent, and the photographs illustrated the kind and degree of force inflicted to cause Ross' injuries. These photographs were inconsistent with Owens' claims of accident, mistake, justification and unintended consequences. Therefore, the photographs depicting substantial trauma and the kind and degree of force used were admissible.
[ .] Owens finally contends that the photographs of the rocks in Ross' mouth were not relevant. However, this evidence aided Dr. Randall's determination that one of the possible causes of death was traumatic asphyxia. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing any of these photographs into evidence.
[ .] 10. Whether the trial court should have granted a judgment of acquittal at the close of the state's case.
[ .] At the end of the state's case, the trial court denied Owens' motion for judgment of acquittal on each of the three murder charges. Owens argues that there was insufficient evidence to establish a premeditated design to effect the death of Ross, that there was insufficient evidence to establish felony murder (robbery), and that there was insufficient evidence to establish felony murder (rape). We disagree. The evidence, together with all reasonable inferences therefrom, sustained a rational theory of premeditated design, intent to commit robbery, and intent to commit rape.
[ .] With respect to premeditation, Owens relies only upon his favorable conduct before and after the homicide. However, direct proof of deliberation and premeditation is not necessary. It may be inferred from the circumstances of the killing. State v. Kost, 290 NW2d 482, 486 (SD 1980); State v. Bean, 265 NW2d 886, 890 (SD 1978). Those circumstances include the use of a deadly weapon, the manner of the killing, and the presence or absence of provocation. State v. Helmer, 1996 SD 31, , 545 NW2d 471, 477; State v. Corder, 460 NW2d 733, 739 (SD 1990). Moreover, extensive planning and calculated deliberation need not be shown to establish premeditation. SDCL 22-16-5; State v. Alton, 432 NW2d 754, 756 (Minn 1988). The design to effect death need exist only for an instant before the commission of a crime. Kost, 290 NW2d at 486; Bean, 265 NW2d at 890; State v. Marshall, 264 NW2d 911, 914 (SD 1978).
[ .] Here, Owens focuses only on selective non-violent conduct before and after the homicide. There was, however, other evidence of Owens' violent state during the entire period of time. Owens admitted, "I was mad and stressed out and I ended up beating Amber [Poppenga] up, and I left the house and it [the murder] happened then." The evidence also revealed that Ross died in an extremely brutal manner. Dr. Randall testified that very significant force and injuries were involved. Ross' jaw was fractured, there was evidence of multiple blows and trauma to Ross' windpipe, the hyoid bone in Ross' neck was broken, and there were rocks forced into Ross' mouth. The jury could have considered all of these facts to be circumstantial evidence of actions designed to inflict
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 South Dakota DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|