 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Andrews3/14/2001
ws stated, "I didn't mean to do it; I'm sorry."
[ .] An autopsy revealed Davis died from the shotgun wound, with the barrel of the gun held 3-5 feet from her head. Andrews was charged with first degree manslaughter and pled not guilty. He was found guilty by a jury and sentenced to serve 30 years in the state penitentiary. He appeals.
ANALYSIS AND DECISION
[ .] 1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in admitting evidence of other acts occurring in the early morning hours of July 13, 1999.
[ .] At a pretrial motion hearing, the State informed Andrews and the trial court it did not intend to introduce other act evidence in its case against Andrews. At trial, however, it introduced evidence of Andrews' blood alcohol content and his driving under the influence , his underage consumption of alcohol, his possessing a stolen firearm and possessing it while under the influence. These facts constituted uncharged crimes allegedly committed by Andrews in the hours immediately leading up to the crime of manslaughter. Andrews objected to admission of this evidence at trial on the grounds that it was other act evidence introduced in violation of SDCL 19-12-5.
[ .] Evidence of other acts requires a two-part balancing analysis by the trial court that must be performed on the record. State v. Steele, 510 NW2d 661, 667 (SD 1994). Such analysis did not occur in the present case. However, this evidence was admissible as res gestae evidence. In State v. Goodroad, 1997 SD 46, , 563 NW2d 126, 130, we held that " vidence of uncharged criminal activity is not considered other crimes evidence if it arose out of the same transaction or series of transactions as the charged offense." We "approved the admission of other crimes where such evidence is 'so blended or connected' with the one on trial . . . that proof of one incident involves the other ; or explains the circumstances; or tends logically to prove any element of the crime charged." Id. (citing State v. Floody, 481 NW2d 242, 253 (SD 1992)).
[ .] In Goodroad, we affirmed the trial court's admission of evidence of the defendant's other criminal acts leading up to the charged crime over a period of more than a month. Here, the disputed evidence involves events taking place over a period of a few hours. These events were interconnected and part of the continuing chain of activities that night that culminated with Davis' death. It is evidence intricately related to the facts of the case and therefore, admissible without reference to SDCL 19-12-5. State v. Loftus, 1997 SD 94, , 566 NW2d 825, 829; State v. Barber, 1996 SD 96, , 552 NW2d 817, 820. This evidence "explains the circumstances" which resulted in Andrews' shooting of Davis and is proper even though it tends to prove Andrews' guilt of other crimes. Goodroad, supra.
[ .] This evidence also addresses Andrews' defense of excusable homicide under SDCL 22-16-30, which provides that " omicide is excusable when committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act, with usual and ordinary caution." This instruction was given at Andrews' request. However, Andrews, underage and driving under the influence through the streets of Rapid City with the barrel of a loaded shotgun pointing out the driver's side window, was not "doing any lawful act" when the gun discharged killing Davis.
[ .] The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting this evidence.
[ .] 2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in allowing testimony from Detective Parsons regarding the results of his testing the shotgun.
[ .] Five days prior to trial, the State filed a motion for the court's endorsement of f
Page 1 2 3 4 5 South Dakota DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|