Case Title: State v. Karov

Citation: 170 Vt. 650, 756 A.2d 1236

Docket Number: 

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 2000-05-10T00:00:00Z

Document:
State v. Karov (99-225); 170 Vt. 650; 756 A.2d 1236

[Filed 10-May-2000]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                       SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 99-225

                              MARCH TERM, 2000

State of Vermont	               }	APPEALED FROM:
                                       }
                                       }
     v.	                               }	District Court of Vermont,
                                       }	Unit No. 2, Addison Circuit
                                       }
Thomas N. Karov	                       }	DOCKET NO. 472-9-97 Ancr

                                                Trial Judge: Dean Pineles, J.

             In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       Defendant  appeals from a jury trial convicting him of first-degree
  aggravated domestic assault,  aggravated assault, two charges of kidnaping,
  and a violation of an abuse prevention order.   Defendant claims that the
  convictions for aggravated domestic assault and aggravated assault violate 
  the Double Jeopardy Clause of the United States Constitution and that the
  trial court erred in  sustaining an objection to defendant's closing
  argument and in denying defendant's motion to  suppress.  We affirm.

       In the evening of September 11, 1997, defendant Thomas Karov went to
  the home of his ex-wife,  Robin Karov.  He was angry about statements she
  made in their divorce case, on appeal to this Court.  He was waving a sheaf
  of papers and began hitting her with them and yelling at her.   She told
  him  he was not supposed to be there, as she had a restraining order
  preventing him from having any  contact with her, and he pulled out a gun. 
  He pointed it at her, saying God had told him to kill her,  and when she
  pushed it away from her head, it went off.  She dashed outside and he came
  outside  after her.  He told her to stop, that he could kill her there just
  as easily as in the house.  She stopped  running.  

       He then dragged her back to the house and began beating her.  He hit
  her on the left side of her head  with the gun, and continued hitting and
  kicking her when she fell to the floor.  At some point, her  friend Eunine
  Bailey arrived.  Defendant grabbed Bailey and dragged her inside the
  trailer.  Bailey  testified that she saw Robin sitting on the couch with a
  bloody nose, blood matted in her hair and  blood running down the left side
  of her face.  Defendant then held the two women hostage for  several hours,
  threatening to kill them and to kill himself.  Eventually, Bailey convinced
  defendant to  give her the firing mechanism of the gun, then the gun
  itself, and finally, to let both of them leave.   At about 12:30 a.m, they
  called Bailey's husband and asked him to call the police.  The women went 
  to the hospital, where Robin's injuries were treated.  

 

       Defendant was charged with five crimes arising out of the incident,
  which lasted approximately four  hours.  He was charged with kidnaping both
  Robin and Bailey and he was charged with violating the  abuse prevention
  order, as well as aggravated assault and aggravated domestic assault.  The
  amended  information charged him with first-degree aggravated domestic
  assault for the act of threatening to  kill a family member, Robin, while
  armed with a gun, and with aggravated assault for the act of  causing
  bodily injury to Robin with a gun.  His case was tried to a jury, and he
  was convicted of all  five counts.  

       On appeal, defendant first argues that the convictions for aggravated
  domestic assault and aggravated  assault violate the Double Jeopardy Clause
  of the United States Constitution. (FN1)   That clause  provides that no
  person may "be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of
  life or  limb."  U.S. Const. Amend. V.  This provision has been
  incorporated into the Fourteenth  Amendment and applies to the states.  See
  Benton v. Maryland,