Title: State v. Hatcher

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

State v. Hatcher  (95-279); 167 Vt. 338; 706 A.2d 429

[Opinion Filed 24-Oct-1997]

[Motion for Reargument Denied 19-Dec-1997]

       NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under
  V.R.A.P. 40 as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont
  Reports.  Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions,
  Vermont Supreme Court, 109 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05609-0801 of
  any errors in order that corrections may be made before this opinion goes
  to press.

                            No. 95-279

State of Vermont                             Supreme Court

                                             On Appeal from
     v.                                       District Court of Vermont,
                                             Unit No. 2, Chittenden Circuit

Mark Hatcher                                 April Term, 1997

Matthew I. Katz, J.

       Jeffrey L. Amestoy, Attorney General, and David Tartter, Assistant
  Attorney General, Montpelier, for plaintiff-appellee

       Charles S. Martin and Reggie Oh, Law Clerk (On the Brief), of Martin &
  Associates, Barre, and Mark Hatcher, pro se, Swanton, for
  defendant-appellant

  PRESENT:  Gibson, Dooley, Morse and Johnson, JJ., and Allen, C.J.
            (Ret.), Specially Assigned

       MORSE, J.   Defendant Mark Hatcher appeals his conviction by jury of
  second-degree murder, in violation of 13 V.S.A. § 2301.  He claims that the
  trial court: (1) erroneously denied his motion for judgment of acquittal
  based on double jeopardy principles and insufficient evidence; (2)
  improperly instructed the jury on the elements of second-degree murder and
  voluntary manslaughter; and (3) wrongly refused to instruct on mutual
  combat and imperfect self-defense.  He also alleges prosecutorial
  misconduct during closing argument.  We affirm.

       On the morning of May 19, 1992, Kelli Baer's body was discovered in
  the living room of her Burlington apartment by a repairman.   A large
  kitchen knife covered with blood was nearby.  An autopsy revealed that the
  victim's throat had been slit and that she had suffered

 

  numerous additional incision wounds to her hands and fingers.  She had also
  suffered bruises and abrasions to her jaw and upper chest, and smaller
  incisions and scratches on her neck, chest, and arms.  The living room was
  in disarray, showing signs of a struggle.  In the adjacent bedroom, a large
  bloodstain was found on the bed and numerous additional bloodstains and
  drops covered the walls, floors, lightswitches, and doors.

       A neighbor of the victim had observed a man angrily pounding on the
  victim's door earlier that morning.  He heard the man shout, "I know you're
  in there; open the door, you fucking bitch."  Shortly thereafter, the
  neighbor heard loud noises and a general commotion coming from the victim's
  apartment.  The disturbance lasted about fifteen minutes.  The neighbor
  later identified defendant from a photographic line-up as the man he had
  observed pounding on the victim's door.  Later that same morning, a cashier
  at a general store in West Addison, some forty-five miles from Burlington,
  sold two sodas to a man meeting defendant's description.  The man had dried
  blood on his hands which he said came from cutting himself with a knife; he
  denied an offer of medical assistance.

       Defendant testified at trial.  He stated that he had been a casual
  acquaintance of the victim.  During the early morning hours of the day in
  question, he and the victim had drinks at a local bar and then returned to
  her apartment.  At some point, the victim went into the bathroom with a
  knife in her hand and shut the door.  After a few moments, he knocked on
  the door and she emerged with the knife.  Defendant put his hand on hers
  and asked for the knife, whereupon she slashed his hand and tried to stab
  him.  According to defendant. a desperate struggle for the knife then
  ensued during which she repeatedly attempted to stab him while he tried to
  wrest away the knife.  Finally, as they struggled face to face, he forced
  the knife into her throat, pulled her to the floor, and sat on her until
  she expired.  Defendant claimed that he had killed the victim to avoid
  being killed or seriously harmed himself.  He never called an ambulance
  because he knew that she was dead and he didn't trust the police. 
  Defendant stated that he was five feet ten inches-tall and weighed 160
  pounds.  The medical examiner described

 

  the victim as five feet five-inches tall and 110 pounds.

       Defendant also presented evidence that the victim had suffered from a
  bipolar disorder, characterized by both manic and depressive moods, that
  she had been hospitalized on several occasions as a result of her illness,
  had suffered panic attacks, and had made several suicidal statements.  She
  was not taking medication.  No physician involved in her treatment,
  however, had ever observed the victim exhibit any violent or dangerous
  behavior toward herself or others. A mental-health worker who met with the
  victim the day before her death testified that she appeared to be doing
  well, and was neither depressed nor manic.  The same witness testified that
  the onset of a manic or depressive cycle is generally not abrupt, but
  occurs over several days or weeks.

                                I.

       Defendant first contends that double jeopardy principles bar his
  conviction of second degree murder.

       Defendant was charged in an information with one count of first-degree
  murder.  At the close of the prosecution's case-in-chief, defendant moved
  for judgment of acquittal.  The trial court granted the motion as to
  first-degree murder, finding that there was insufficient evidence of
  premeditation and deliberation, but allowed the trial to continue on the
  lesser-included offense of second-degree murder.

       The court's decision to submit the reduced charge to the jury was well
  within its authority and did not violate the double jeopardy clause.  A
  defendant charged with first-degree murder may be convicted of the
  lesser-included offenses of second-degree murder or manslaughter.  In re
  Murray, 131 Vt. 4, 7,