Case Title: State v. Allen

Citation: 169 Vt. 615, 738 A.2d 113

Docket Number: 

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 1999-07-19T00:00:00Z

Document:
State v. Allen (98-163); 169 Vt. 615; 738 A.2d 113

[Filed 19-Jul-1999]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                       SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 98-163

                              APRIL TERM, 1999

State of Vermont	               }	APPEALED FROM:
                                       }
                                       }
     v.	                               }	District Court of Vermont
                                       }	
                                       }	Unit No. 2, Chittenden Circuit
Michael Allen	                       }
                                       }	DOCKET NO. 2980-6-97Cncr	

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

       Defendant Michael Allen appeals from a conviction on a charge of
  aggravated assault in  violation of 13 V.S.A. § 1024(a)(1) (recklessly
  causing serious bodily injury in circumstances  manifesting extreme
  indifference to the value of human life).  Defendant asserts that the
  district court  erred by (1) not excluding evidence of his prior
  altercations on the date in question, (2) disallowing  a defense of
  diminished capacity due to intoxication, and (3) denying his motion for
  judgment of  acquittal based on a failure to prove the victim sustained
  serious bodily injury.  We affirm.

       Defendant's conviction stems from events that occurred on June 25,
  1997 in Burlington.   Immediately prior to the incident in question,
  defendant, then sixteen years old, had been involved  in several
  altercations in the downtown shopping area.  These included a fight with
  the victim's  brother, during which defendant lost his pager.  This fight
  took place in the presence of the victim  and others.  Defendant shouted
  racially charged remarks while throwing a glass at the victim and his 
  companions.  Soon after, defendant struck a person sitting on a bench with
  a small baseball bat.  At  this point, the incident giving rise to the
  State's charge took place.  Defendant, a white teenager,  approached the
  victim, a black teenager, and his companions.  Suspecting that his pager
  had been  stolen, defendant asked the group where it was.  The victim and
  his companions fled.  Defendant  then chased the victim into the Burlington
  Square Mall, caught up to him, and beat him with the  small baseball bat. 
  As a result, the victim was hospitalized for three days, sustaining a
  permanent  eye impairment that places him at increased risk for developing
  glaucoma.  The State subsequently  charged the defendant with aggravated
  assault pursuant to 13 V.S.A. § 1024(a)(1).  

 

       First, defendant contends that the court should have excluded evidence
  of defendant's prior  encounters on the date in question.  He sought in
  limine to exclude this evidence under V.R.E. 403  (authorizing exclusion of
  otherwise relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially 
  outweighed by unfair prejudice).  Defendant argues that the prior
  altercations and racial slurs  introduced unfair prejudice.  We conclude
  that the trial court reasonably exercised its discretion.  See  State v.
  LaBounty, ___ Vt. ___, ___,